<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1987 (11) TMI 370 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156464</link>
    <description>Preventive detention is invalid where vital investigation materials, including Section 161 CrPC statements, are not supplied to the detenu and are not placed before the detaining authority, because this denies an effective representation under Article 22(5) and undermines subjective satisfaction. The Court also applied the settled distinction between law and order and public order: an isolated murder affecting only particular individuals was treated as a law and order issue, while firing incidents in a public street and a court compound were held to have wider public impact and thus affect public order. The detention was sustained as quashed for want of full disclosure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Sep 2013 11:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (11) TMI 370 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156464</link>
      <description>Preventive detention is invalid where vital investigation materials, including Section 161 CrPC statements, are not supplied to the detenu and are not placed before the detaining authority, because this denies an effective representation under Article 22(5) and undermines subjective satisfaction. The Court also applied the settled distinction between law and order and public order: an isolated murder affecting only particular individuals was treated as a law and order issue, while firing incidents in a public street and a court compound were held to have wider public impact and thus affect public order. The detention was sustained as quashed for want of full disclosure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156464</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>