Court rejected the writ petition as misconceived because the petitioner challenged a detention order but only sought review of a separate representation without impugning the detention order itself.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
12. cri wp 623-17.doc
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 623 OF 2017
Shriniwas Kishor Sanga
.. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
.. Respondents
Appearances
| Mr. Priyal | G. Sarda Advocate for the Petitioner |
|---|---|
| Mrs. M.H. | Mhatre APP for the State |
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
M.S. KARNIK, JJ.
DATE : APRIL 4, 2017.
P.C.:
1. The petitioner / detenu has been detained under the
M.P.D.A. Act as he is a dangerous person. The said detention
order was issued on 21.10.2016. However, it is seen that no
prayers have been made in relation to the detention order in
this petition. Instead, what is prayed is that the petitioner
preferred an application dated 22.11.2016 to the State
Government (Secretary of Home Department) under 14(1) of
the M.P.D.A. Act and the said application may be considered
jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 2
12. cri wp 623-17.doc
on its own merits.
a representation to the State Government and to the Advisory Board. There is no provision to make an "application" under Section 14(1) of the M.P.D.A. Act. It appears that the application of the petitioner was treated as his representation and the said representation came to be
rejected by the State Government by order dated 30.11.2016. It is not possible for us to look into this order
without the detention order being assailed. This petition is misconceived, hence, it is rejected.
[ M.S. KARNIK, J. ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]
jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petition challenging a detention order can proceed without expressly impugning the detention order when the prayer concerns a separate representation.
Shriniwas Kishor Sanga
The State of Maharashtra
V.K. Tahilramani
M.S. Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
