MRS. GEETINDER KAUR versus STAIE OF PUNJAB AND 2 ORS.

MRS. GEETINDER KAUR versus STAIE OF PUNJAB AND 2 ORS.

The detaining authority's administrative choice of place of detention is not shown to be arbitrary or in violation of a specific law. The detenu has received adequate amenities and facilities, and the nature of detention, including separation from ordinary prisoners, does not warrant interference. The requirements of detention are met and the petitioner's reliefs are not substantiated by evidence.

Parties
Petitioner: Geetinder Kaur; Respondent No. 1: State of Punjab; Respondent No. 2: State of Rajasthan; Respondent No. 3: Respondent No. 3
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
23 July 1985
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (criminal) No. 391 of 1985 / Original Jurisdiction; Final Disposal
Outcome
Petition disposed of; reliefs not granted
Legal Topics
Place of Detention, Detenu Rights, Solitary Confinement, Amenities and Facilities for Detenu
National Security Preventive Detention Constitutional Law Place of Detention Detenu Rights Solitary Confinement Amenities and Facilities for Detenu

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Geetinder Kaur

Petitioner

State of Punjab

Respondent No. 1

State of Rajasthan

Respondent No. 2

Respondent No. 3

Respondent No. 3

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (criminal) No. 391 of 1985 / Original Jurisdiction; Final Disposal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Validity of detaining a detenu outside home state
  2. 2 Whether detenu is entitled to be detained in home state
  3. 3 Provision of amenities and facilities to detenu

Ratio Decidendi

The detaining authority's administrative choice of place of detention is not shown to be arbitrary or in violation of a specific law. The detenu has received adequate amenities and facilities, and the nature of detention, including separation from ordinary prisoners, does not warrant interference. The requirements of detention are met and the petitioner's reliefs are not substantiated by evidence.

Court Disposition

Petition disposed of; reliefs not granted

Orders

  • Jail authorities to continue providing detenu with necessary amenities and facilities subject to security.
  • Jail authorities to allow interviews with relatives, friends, and legal adviser if application is made and to dispose applications expeditiously.