Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Constitutional law

PRAMOD SINGLA versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS

There is no operative conflict between Pankaj Kumar and Abdullah Kunhi because they apply to different authorities: Pankaj Kumar's mandate applies to the detaining authority while Abdullah Kunhi applies to the Central Government under COFEPOSA; in the present case both authorities acted within law—therefore the 60-day delay by the Central Government awaiting the Advisory Board did not invalidate the detention order—but because illegible foreign language documents were relied upon and a similarly placed co-detenue had been granted relief, the impugned detention order is liable to be set aside.

Source excerpt

  • Representation under article 22(5)
  • Advisory board procedure
  • Cofeposa act s.3
  • Delay in consideration of representation
  • Illegible grounds of detention
  • Parity principle
Read case analysis
Criminal law

D.M. NAGARAJA versus THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

The appellant’s habitual criminal activities caused harm to public order and could not be curbed by ordinary law. The Detaining Authority’s subjective satisfaction was supported by materials, and all statutory safeguards were complied with. There is no constitutional or statutory requirement to consider representation before confirmation of the detention order. The detention order and its confirmation were justified.

Source excerpt

  • Preventive detention
  • Detention orders
  • Constitutional safeguards
  • Habitual offenders
  • Representation under article 22(5)
Read case analysis
Preventive detention

T.A. ABDUL RAHMAN versus STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

Failure to satisfactorily explain delay in securing the arrest after the order of detention and unexplained long delay in disposal of representation vitiates subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority and violates Article 22(5), rendering the detention order invalid.

Source excerpt

  • Delay in detention order execution
  • Subjective satisfaction of detaining authority
  • Representation under article 22(5)
Read case analysis
Preventive detention

PUSHPADEVI M. JATIA versus M.L. WADHAVAN, ADDL. SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS.

Detention was upheld as detaining authority's subjective satisfaction had valid material basis; claims of mis-statement, lack of gazetted officer status, and violation of Article 22(5) were unsubstantiated, and principle that one invalid ground vitiates detention no longer holds due to s.5A COFEPOSA.

Source excerpt

  • Cofeposa detention
  • Subjective satisfaction of detaining authority
  • Judicial review of detention
  • De facto doctrine
  • Evidence admissibility
  • Representation under article 22(5)
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.