https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196853 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 in a habeas corpus challenge to preventive detention depends on whether the authority or person is within the court's limits, or whether part of the cause of action arises there. The court rejected the broad claim that such petitions may be filed wherever the detenu alleges infringement of movement and residence rights, as that would defeat territorial limits and encourage forum shopping. It held that when the detenu is taken into custody and contemporaneously served with the detention order and grounds, that place forms part of the cause of action. On the stated facts, Ulhasnagar attracted jurisdiction. en-us Fri, 07 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Dec 2017 17:24:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196853 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 in a habeas corpus challenge to preventive detention depends on whether the authority or person is within the court's limits, or whether part of the cause of action arises there. The court rejected the broad claim that such petitions may be filed wherever the detenu alleges infringement of movement and residence rights, as that would defeat territorial limits and encourage forum shopping. It held that when the detenu is taken into custody and contemporaneously served with the detention order and grounds, that place forms part of the cause of action. On the stated facts, Ulhasnagar attracted jurisdiction. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 07 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196853