Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“In other words, a detenue may be able to make an effective representation if the details of the facts, on the basis of which conclusion is drawn by the detaining authority, are furnished to him”.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Kerala High Court: A Division Bench of K Vinod Chandra and C Vijayachandran, JJ. dismissed the petition and rejected the relief sought

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Gujarat High Court: Rajendra M. Sareen, J. allowed a petition which was directed against the detention order passed by respondent–detaining authority in

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Kerala High Court: In an interesting case regarding custody of a major the Division Bench of K. Vinod Chandran and M.R. Anitha,

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Rajnesh Oswal, J., while rejecting the present petition on lack of merits, said, “…this Court is of

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Patna High Court: A Division Bench of Sanjay Karol, CJ. and S. Kumar, J., while allowing the present petition, discussed the issue

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Sanjay Dhar J., while allowing the present petition held, “The service of the grounds of detention on

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Gujarat High Court: S.H. Vohra, J., allowed a petition which was filed aggrieved against the order of detention passed by the respondent

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Puneet Gupta, J. detention order quashed and non-application of mind by the detaining authority in the present

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: Sharad Kumar Sharma, J., while addressing a habeas corpus petition observed that, The intimacy of marriage, including the choice of

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Ali Mohammad Magrey, J. allowed the application filed by the petitioner to free him from detention. The

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Karnataka High Court: The Division Bench of K.N. Phaneendra and K. Somashekhar, JJ. hearing a petition in the nature of habeas corpus,