#Detention Jurisprudence

Karnataka High Court sets aside a detention order under the PITNDPS Act, ruling that failure to supply relied-upon documents to the detenu deprives them of the constitutional right to make an effective representation. The judgment reinforces that procedural fairness under Article 22(5) is non-negotiable in preventive detention cases.

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that an initial detention order under the National Security Act must explicitly specify the detention period to be valid. Failure to comply renders the order void ab initio, setting aside both the detention and subsequent extension orders. The judgment reinforces procedural safeguards against arbitrary detention, impacting all NSA detentions in the state.