https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198967 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 in preventive detention matters cannot rest on the detenu's residence or apprehended arrest alone; a court must identify a part of the cause of action within its territory. The text also stresses that an alleged stay order supported only by photocopies and a later certified copy, without service of the original on the State for several years, raises serious authenticity concerns. In such circumstances, the court treated the document as suspect, directed inquiry, and held that the State was not bound to act on the alleged stay order. en-us Mon, 21 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Feb 2018 13:28:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198967 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 in preventive detention matters cannot rest on the detenu's residence or apprehended arrest alone; a court must identify a part of the cause of action within its territory. The text also stresses that an alleged stay order supported only by photocopies and a later certified copy, without service of the original on the State for several years, raises serious authenticity concerns. In such circumstances, the court treated the document as suspect, directed inquiry, and held that the State was not bound to act on the alleged stay order. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 21 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198967