K.M. Abdulla Kunhi Thru C.M. Mahin Vs. State of Karnataka and Ors.
EmailAppeal: Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 508 of 1989
Petitioner: K.M. Abdulla Kunhi Thru C.M. Mahin
Respondent: State of Karnataka and Ors.
Apeal: Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 508 of 1989
Judges: Dr. A.S. ANAND C.J.I., R.C. LAHOTI & S.N. VARIAVA, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jul 04, 2000
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAW
COFEPOSA Act, 1974
Sections 10,12 – Period of detention – Detenue on parole since long – Need to take back the detenue in custody – Concession made by counsel for UOI that in view of judgment in Sunil Fulchand Shah’s case (JT 2000 (2) SC 230) detenue will not be taken in custody. Held that in view of statement, appeals are dismissed.
Cases Reffered:
1. Sunil Fulchand shah. v. Union of India & Ors. (JT 2000 (2) SC 230)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Learned Counsel appearing for the Union of India submits that in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sunil Fulchand Shah v. Union of India & Ors. (JT 2000 (2) SC 230) and the fact that long time has elapsed since the petitioner in each one of these cases was released on parole, he shall not be taken back into custody at this point of time in connection with the order of detention which was the subject matter of challenge in the writ petition.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners in W.P. (Crl.) 542/1989 and S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 2117/1989 submits that he is satisfied with the statement and that the petitions may be dismissed as withdrawn. Accordingly, these two petitions are dismissed as withdrawn.
W.P. (Crl.) 508/1989 & S.L.P. (Crl.) 2009/1989
3. No one is present on behalf of the petitioners. We have heard learned Counsel for the respondent-Union of India who submits that in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sunil Fulchand Shah. v. Union of India & Ors. (supra) and the fact that long time has elapsed since the petitioner in each one of the petitions was released on parole, he shall not be taken back into custody at this point of time in connection with the order of detention which was the subject matter of challenge in the writ petition. We record the statement of the learned Counsel for the Union of India and dismiss these petitions.
1. Learned Counsel appearing for the Union of India submits that in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sunil Fulchand Shah v. Union of India & Ors. (JT 2000 (2) SC 230) and the fact that long time has elapsed since the petitioner in each one of these cases was released on parole, he shall not be taken back into custody at this point of time in connection with the order of detention which was the subject matter of challenge in the writ petition.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners in W.P. (Crl.) 542/1989 and S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 2117/1989 submits that he is satisfied with the statement and that the petitions may be dismissed as withdrawn. Accordingly, these two petitions are dismissed as withdrawn.
W.P. (Crl.) 508/1989 & S.L.P. (Crl.) 2009/1989
3. No one is present on behalf of the petitioners. We have heard learned Counsel for the respondent-Union of India who submits that in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sunil Fulchand Shah. v. Union of India & Ors. (supra) and the fact that long time has elapsed since the petitioner in each one of the petitions was released on parole, he shall not be taken back into custody at this point of time in connection with the order of detention which was the subject matter of challenge in the writ petition. We record the statement of the learned Counsel for the Union of India and dismiss these petitions.
