Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Monday, 21 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2017-07-17 allowed

Lahu Shrirang Gatkal vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors

Bench: 2 — <UNKNOWN>, <UNKNOWN>

In Brief

The appellant, a constable with seven criminal complaints/FIRs registered against him, was detained under Section 3(1) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981, by detention order dated 10 October 2016. The detention order failed to specify any period of detention. The High Court dismissed his writ petition. The Supreme Court held that preventive detention statutes require strict interpretation. The statute mandates that detention orders must specify the detention period, with a maximum cap of six months initially. A blanket detention order without specifying the period violates statutory procedure and legislative intent to enable periodic review. The Court allowed the appeal and set aside the detention order as unsustainable, ordering the detenu's immediate release.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Preventive Detention Civil Rights Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Constitutional Procedure

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login