https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190502 Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was treated as a temporary preventive power aimed at urgent threats to public order, tranquillity, safety and related disturbances, and it was upheld as a reasonable restriction on fundamental freedoms because it contained procedural safeguards such as written orders, recorded reasons, limited duration and remedies for rescission or review. Chapter VIII was likewise upheld as a preventive justice scheme for maintaining public order, but the majority held that section 117(3) could not be used to impose interim bond and detention without some inquiry into the truth of the information, while the concurring opinion read that power more broadly. The challenge to constitutional validity failed. en-us Wed, 28 Oct 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:07:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190502 Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was treated as a temporary preventive power aimed at urgent threats to public order, tranquillity, safety and related disturbances, and it was upheld as a reasonable restriction on fundamental freedoms because it contained procedural safeguards such as written orders, recorded reasons, limited duration and remedies for rescission or review. Chapter VIII was likewise upheld as a preventive justice scheme for maintaining public order, but the majority held that section 117(3) could not be used to impose interim bond and detention without some inquiry into the truth of the information, while the concurring opinion read that power more broadly. The challenge to constitutional validity failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 28 Oct 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190502