Sold Property During Pending Appeal, Defied Court Order: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sends Man To Jail For Contempt Hostile Witness Cannot Erase a Bribe Demand Already Made on Record: Supreme Court Restores Conviction of Ration Officer Three Decades of Unpaid Wages: Supreme Court Strips Gannon Dunkerley of Control Over Sick Company's Assets, Appoints Administrator to Pay Workers by August 2026 Gram Nyayalaya Cannot Touch Family Court's Maintenance Orders — Allahabad High Court Draws the Line Caste Abuse Allegation at Village Jatra Is Counter-Blast to Earlier Machete Attack: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Despite SC/ST Act Bar Contributory Negligence | Not Wearing a Helmet Does Not Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Madras High Court Air Force Can't Punish Officer After Criminal Court Sets Him Free: Supreme Court Overturns 30-Year-Old Dismissal Written Statement Without Affidavit of Admission/Denial: Non-Est Filing or Curable Defect? Delhi High Court Refers Conflicting Views to Larger Bench Bank's Negligence Killed Cheque Bounce Case Before It Could Begin: Supreme Court Rules Section 138 Remedy Lost Due to Stale Cheques Bank Letting Your Cheques Go Stale Is Deficiency in Service: Supreme Court Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Benefit Of Probation Act Available Even If Offender Is Sentenced Solely To Fine: Supreme Court Reporting Registration Of FIR Based On Public Records Does Not Violate Right To Privacy: Sikkim High Court CBSE Cannot Cancel Class XII Results Based on Similar MCQ Answers Alone Without Any Report of Malpractice From Examination Centre: Orissa High Court

"Detenue's Rights Infringed Due to Failure to Provide Relevant Documents," Rules Karnataka High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a judgment dated August 31, 2023, the High Court of Karnataka quashed detention orders, citing infringement of the detenue's rights due to procedural lapses. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to legal requirements and constitutional provisions.

Justice Mohammad Nawaz and Justice Rajesh Rai K presided over the case, Writ Petition No. 201957/2023, involving Smt. Shrenika as the petitioner and the State of Karnataka among the respondents.

The court observed, "Failure to provide the detenue with relevant documents within the stipulated 21-day period infringes upon the detenue's rights to defend against illegal detention." [Para 7]

The judgment also highlighted the violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India. "The sponsoring authority's failure to provide translated and legible copies of documents to the detenue withheld the detenue's right to make effective representation before the Government and Advisory Board," the court noted. [Para 22]

Discussing the role of the Advisory Board in detention cases, the court stated that the board's opinion is crucial for the continuation or revocation of detention. [Para 16]

In the final decision, the court quashed the detention orders passed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and directed them to set the detenue at liberty. [Para 29]

Date of Decision 31st August 2023     

 SMT. SHRENIKA vs .THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,       

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Shrenika_vs_The_State_Of_Karnataka_And_Ors_on_31_August_2023_KarntHC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News