“Specific Justification for Continued Detention is Mandatory”

Home - “Specific Justification for Continued Detention is Mandatory”

Posted inNews

Delhi High Court Rejects State’s Plea for Extension of Investigation Time Under Section 43D(2) of UAPA: “Specific Justification for Continued Detention is Mandatory”

Court’s Decision The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court’s rejection of the State's application seeking an extension of the investigation period beyond the statutory 90 days under Section 43D(2)…

Posted by

Rawlaw December 17, 2024

Recent News

Kerala High Court Upholds State’s Right to Probe Waqf Board’s “Land Grab”: “State Cannot Be a Silent Spectator When Citizens’ Livelihoods Are at Stake”
Patna High Court Quashes State Remission Board’s Order Rejecting Premature Release: “Power of Clemency Must Reflect Fairness — Not Mechanical Refusal”
Patna High Court Quashes Remission Board Order Rejecting Life Convict’s Plea for Premature Release: “Remission Is Not a Matter of Charity, It Is a Right to Be Considered Fairly”
Kerala High Court Upholds Validity of Panchayat Delimitation Process: “Courts Will Not Interfere in Electoral Exercises Except for Patent Illegality”
Delhi High Court Declares Termination of Senior Executive as Illegal: “An Employer Cannot Arbitrarily End Employment by Disguising It as ‘Loss of Confidence’”

Scroll to Top