Jharkhand High Court Upholds Preventive Detention Extensions of Upendra Yadav
Court rules no Advisory Board approval needed for extensions beyond initial confirmatory order under Jharkhand Control of Crimes Act, 2002.
In a significant judgment, the Jharkhand High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Upendra Yadav, challenging the repeated extensions of his preventive detention under the Jharkhand Control of Crimes Act, 2002. The bench, comprising Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Arun Kumar Rai, held that once the Advisory Board confirms the initial detention order, subsequent extensions do not require further approval from the Board, allowing detention to continue up to a maximum of twelve months.
The petitioner, Upendra Yadav, was detained based on his habitual criminal activities, which posed a threat to public order. The State Government extended his detention multiple times, from February 2025 to November 2025, citing continuous criminal conduct. Yadav's counsel argued that these extensions lacked sufficient grounds and were made without new facts or Advisory Board approval, violating statutory requirements.
The Court, however, found that Yadav's activities fell under the definition of "anti-social elements" as per Section 2(d) of the Act, which justified his detention. It also referred to the Supreme Court's ruling in Pesala Nookaraju v. State of A.P., asserting that once the Advisory Board confirms a detention, the State Government can extend it without further review, up to twelve months.
The judgment reinforces the State's authority to maintain public order through preventive detention, emphasizing the importance of addressing habitual criminal activities effectively.
Bottom Line:
Jharkhand Control of Crimes Act, 2002 - Preventive detention order extended multiple times - No approval of Advisory Board is required for subsequent extensions after initial confirmatory order is passed by the State Government based on Advisory Board's opinion.
Statutory provision(s): Jharkhand Control of Crimes Act, 2002 Sections 2(d), 12, 18, 19, 21, 22.
Trending News
Gauhati HC quashes sedition case against Assam MLA Aminul Islam
Supreme Court Directs Chancellor of APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University to Act on Committee Report
Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Termination of Anganwari Worker for Defiance and Insubordination