TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Preventive detention serious invasion of personal liberty: Supreme Court

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

New Delhi, September 30

Advertisement

Terming preventive detention as a “serious invasion of personal liberty”, the Supreme Court on Friday ordered forthwith release of a man arrested under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, (PIT NDPS) 1988, for withholding bail orders by detaining authorities.

Advertisement

A Bench of Chief Justice of India UU Lalit, Justice S Ravindra Bhat and Justice JB Pardiwala set aside a Tripura High Court verdict which held that if the detenu was not prejudiced by non-supply of a particular document, he couldn’t gain any benefit merely by agitating that a document mentioned in the detention order was not supplied.

It took exception to the unexplained delay in detention of accused Sushanta Kumar Banik and withholding bail orders by detaining authorities, saying whatever little safeguards the Constitution and the law authorising such action provided must be strictly adhered to.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement