https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175230 The court found that the detenu's right to be represented by a legal practitioner before the Advisory Board was violated. The detenu's request for legal representation was not properly considered, leading to the detention order being set aside and quashed. The court emphasized that such requests should be evaluated on their merits and not denied arbitrarily. The Advisory Board's rejection based on "obvious reasons" was deemed contradictory to established legal principles. As a result, the detenu's continuous detention was declared unlawful, with the direction for release if not required in any other matter. en-us Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Nov 2015 16:27:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175230 The court found that the detenu's right to be represented by a legal practitioner before the Advisory Board was violated. The detenu's request for legal representation was not properly considered, leading to the detention order being set aside and quashed. The court emphasized that such requests should be evaluated on their merits and not denied arbitrarily. The Advisory Board's rejection based on "obvious reasons" was deemed contradictory to established legal principles. As a result, the detenu's continuous detention was declared unlawful, with the direction for release if not required in any other matter. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175230