SC judgement on grounds of appeal in Pankaj Bansal is not applicable on UAPA
The author can be reached at shaifaly.ca@gmail.com
Table of Contents
Cases Covered:
AMIT CHAKRABORTY VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Citations:
1. Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India & Ors
2. K.M. Abdulla Kunhi and B.L. Abdul Khader vs. Union of India and Others,
3. V. Senthil Balaji vs. State Represented by Deputy Director and Ors Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore vs. Srikumar Agencies & Ors
4. Goan Real Estate and Constructions Limited & Another vs. Union Of India & Others
5. L. Muruganantham vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others
Facts of the cases:
The petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-
“A. Declare the arrest of the Petitioner as illegal and in gross violation of the fundamental rights of the Petitioner guaranteed under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India in relation to FIR No. 224/2023 dated 17.08.2023 PS Special Cell, Lodhi Road, Delhi Police;
B. Declare and set aside the Remand Order dated 04.10.2023 passed by the Ld. Special Judge, Patiala House Court as null and void as the same being passed in complete violation of all constitutional mandates including failure to consult and to be defended by legal practitioner of his choice during the Remand Proceedings, being violative of Petitioner’s right guaranteed under Article 22 of the Constitution of India.
C. Direct immediate release of the Petitioner from custody in FIR No. 224/2023 dated 17.08.2023 PS Special Cell, Lodhi Road, Delhi Police.”
Observation & Judgement of the Court:
Keeping in view the observations so made and the law as laid down, while considering the lack of facts and material particulars in the present petition, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present petitioner is not entitled to any relief as sought in the present petition. 51. So far as the arguments of the petitioner being a differently abled person and suffering from physical disability to the extent of 59% and being covered under the provisions of The Rights Of Persons With Disabilities Act, 2016 is concerned, keeping in view the fact that serious offences affecting the stability, integrity, sovereignty and national security have been alleged against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to pass any favorable orders
Read & Download the Full AMIT CHAKRABORTY VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
[pdf_attachment file=”1″ name=”optional file name”]
CA
