https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168797 Preventive restrictions under the Central Provinces and Berar Goondas Act were found to be unreasonable because the statute left the essential determination of whether a person was a goonda to unguided executive discretion. The Act's object of preserving public peace did not cure the defect, since the District Magistrate was not required to apply defined statutory standards before making restrictive orders and the hearing provision did not provide adequate safeguards. Sections 4 and 4-A were therefore invalid under Art. 19(1)(d) and (e) and not saved by Art. 19(5), making the externment-based restriction unconstitutional. en-us Mon, 03 Oct 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Mar 2015 18:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168797 Preventive restrictions under the Central Provinces and Berar Goondas Act were found to be unreasonable because the statute left the essential determination of whether a person was a goonda to unguided executive discretion. The Act's object of preserving public peace did not cure the defect, since the District Magistrate was not required to apply defined statutory standards before making restrictive orders and the hearing provision did not provide adequate safeguards. Sections 4 and 4-A were therefore invalid under Art. 19(1)(d) and (e) and not saved by Art. 19(5), making the externment-based restriction unconstitutional. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 03 Oct 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168797