GODAVARI PARULEKAR versus STATE OF BOMBAY AND OTHERS

GODAVARI PARULEKAR versus STATE OF BOMBAY AND OTHERS

Section 11-A of the Preventive Detention Act (as amended) does not contravene Articles 14 or 22(7)(b) of the Constitution merely because it introduces a classification based on the date of confirmation; the classification is reasonable. The section is not discriminatory merely because detention periods may vary within a class. Section 11-A(2) validly extends detention orders not specifying a shorter period until 1st April 1953.

Parties
Petitioner: Godavari Parulekar; Respondent: State of Bombay and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 December 1952
Procedural Posture
Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution for a Writ in the Nature of Habeas Corpus / Original Jurisdiction
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Validity of Preventive Detention Act Amendments, Period of Detention, Classification of Detentions, Discrimination Under Articles 14 and 22(7)(b)
Constitutional Law Preventive Detention Validity of Preventive Detention Act Amendments Period of Detention Classification of Detentions Discrimination Under Articles 14 and 22(7)(b)

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Godavari Parulekar

Petitioner

State of Bombay and Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution for a Writ in the Nature of Habeas Corpus / Original Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 11-A of the Preventive Detention Act (as amended) is discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 22(7)(b) of the Constitution
  2. 2 Interpretation of 'unless a shorter period is specified in the order' under section 11-A(2)
  3. 3 Whether the extension of maximum period of detention is valid for orders where no period is specified

Ratio Decidendi

Section 11-A of the Preventive Detention Act (as amended) does not contravene Articles 14 or 22(7)(b) of the Constitution merely because it introduces a classification based on the date of confirmation; the classification is reasonable. The section is not discriminatory merely because detention periods may vary within a class. Section 11-A(2) validly extends detention orders not specifying a shorter period until 1st April 1953.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.