DEB SADHAN ROY versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL
The mandatory provisions for detention and confirmation under the Act and Article 22(4) were fully complied with; confirmation was made within three months, and delay in communication did not prejudice the petitioner. The grounds of detention were not vague, and the acts alleged amount to disturbance of public order under the Act.
- Parties
- Petitioner: Deb Sadhan Roy; Respondent: State of West Bengal
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 07 December 1971
- Procedural Posture
- Writ Petition / Final Decision
- Outcome
- Petition dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Preventive Detention, West Bengal (prevention of Violent Activities) Act 1970, Article 32 of the Constitution, Article 22 of the Constitution
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Deb Sadhan Roy
Petitioner
State of West Bengal
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition / Final Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether confirmation of the Advisory Board's recommendation for detention beyond three months under Section 12 must be within three months and communicated to the detenu within that period.
- 2 Whether grounds of detention are vague due to not mentioning the names of associates.
- 3 Whether alleged facts amount to disturbance of public order under Section 3(2)(c) of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The mandatory provisions for detention and confirmation under the Act and Article 22(4) were fully complied with; confirmation was made within three months, and delay in communication did not prejudice the petitioner. The grounds of detention were not vague, and the acts alleged amount to disturbance of public order under the Act.
Court Disposition
Petition dismissed
Orders
- Petition dismissed; detention of petitioner not illegal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment