Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Shakir v. Union Of India Thru' Principal Secy. & Ors. - HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. 70396 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 6883 (16 April 2007)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 70396 of 2006

Hon'ble Yatindra Singh, J

Hon'ble RK Rastogi, J

1. There was tension in the month of April 2006 in Aligarh. An incident took place in which a bomb exploded inside a house. A first information report was lodged on 10.4.2006. It is alleged in the FIR that the petitioner alongwith three other persons were involved in making the bomb that had exploded.

2. The District Magistrate, Aligarh passed detention order on 15.6.2006 on the satisfaction that this accidental explosion created terror and detention of the petitioner was necessary under National Security Act (the NSA).

3. The petitioner filed a representation on 7.7.2006. This representation was rejected by the State Government on 14.7.2006 and was rejected by the Central Government on 31.7.2006, hence the present Habeas Corpus Writ Petition.

4. We have heard counsel for the petitioner, AGA and Sri NI Jafri for respondents. The counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no satisfaction of the detaining authority that the petitioner is likely to be released on bail.

5. The detention order is before the court. Neither the satisfaction of the detaining authority is recorded nor there is any material to show as to how the detaining authority was satisfied that the petitioner was likely to be released on the bail.  In fact the petitioner was not released on bail on the date when the detention order was passed. The bail order was passed much after the detention order. In view of this, the detention order is illegal. It is hereby quashed. The petitioner is set at liberty unless  he is wanted in any other case. With these observations the writ petition is allowed.

Date: 16.4.2007



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.