https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287985 Section 205 of the Government of India Act, 1935 was treated as wide enough to support appeals from habeas corpus orders where the required certificate was granted. Rule 26 of the Defence of India Rules was upheld as within the general rule-making power in the Defence of India Act, 1939, because the illustrative sub-clause did not cut down the main grant of power. Authenticated detention orders were not invalid merely because the Governor had not personally considered each case, and the statutory presumptions under the governing enactments remained rebuttable. On the facts, two detention orders were invalid because the routine order displaced the statutory satisfaction required, while four were sustained. en-us Tue, 17 Jul 1945 00:00:00 +0630 Wed, 13 May 2020 11:34:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287985 Section 205 of the Government of India Act, 1935 was treated as wide enough to support appeals from habeas corpus orders where the required certificate was granted. Rule 26 of the Defence of India Rules was upheld as within the general rule-making power in the Defence of India Act, 1939, because the illustrative sub-clause did not cut down the main grant of power. Authenticated detention orders were not invalid merely because the Governor had not personally considered each case, and the statutory presumptions under the governing enactments remained rebuttable. On the facts, two detention orders were invalid because the routine order displaced the statutory satisfaction required, while four were sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 17 Jul 1945 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287985