BORJAHAN GOREY versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

BORJAHAN GOREY versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

The possibility of criminal prosecution or preventive proceedings under the Code of Criminal Procedure does not bar the government from detaining the petitioner under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971. The authority's subjective satisfaction based on past acts and their relevance to public order sufficed for preventive detention. The grounds supplied and affirmed were not shown to be false or mala fide, and there was no legal infirmity in the order.

Parties
Petitioner: Borjahan Gorey; Respondent: State of West Bengal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 August 1972
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Disposition by the Supreme Court
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Article 32, Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971, Preventive Detention, Criminal Procedure Code Ss. 109 and 110, Subjective Satisfaction, Detention Grounds
Constitutional Law Preventive Detention Article 32 Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 Criminal Procedure Code Ss. 109 and 110 Subjective Satisfaction Detention Grounds

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Borjahan Gorey

Petitioner

State of West Bengal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Disposition by the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether facts supporting preventive proceedings under ss. 109 & 110 CrPC preclude detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 s. 3
  2. 2 Whether the District Magistrate's order of detention was mala fide or based on incorrect grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The possibility of criminal prosecution or preventive proceedings under the Code of Criminal Procedure does not bar the government from detaining the petitioner under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971. The authority's subjective satisfaction based on past acts and their relevance to public order sufficed for preventive detention. The grounds supplied and affirmed were not shown to be false or mala fide, and there was no legal infirmity in the order.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petition dismissed.