Preventive detention fails when material facts on confession voluntariness and retraction are withheld from the detaining authority.

Preventive detention was held illegal where the detaining authority was not informed of material facts bearing on the voluntariness and retraction of the detenu's confession. The Supreme Court noted that refusal of counsel during interrogation, failure to produce the detenu before the Magistrate as indicated, and prompt retraction in judicial custody were directly relevant to the weight and reliability of the statements. Because these surrounding circumstances were withheld and not considered before the detention order was made, the authority's subjective satisfaction was vitiated by non-application of mind. The detention order was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention order was vitiated because the detaining authority was not placed in possession of material facts bearing on the voluntariness and retraction of the detenu's confessional statements.

Analysis: A detention order founded on subjective satisfaction is invalid if material or vital facts having a bearing on the decision are ignored or withheld from the detaining authority. The record showed that the detenu's request for the presence or consultation of counsel during interrogation was refused, that he was not produced before the Magistrate on the date indicated to the advocate, and that he retracted the earlier statements at the first available opportunity while in judicial custody. These facts were directly relevant to whether the statements were voluntary and to the weight to be attached to them. Since they were not placed before or considered by the authority before the detention order was made, the requisite satisfaction stood vitiated.

Conclusion: The detention order was invalid for non-application of mind to material facts and was set aside in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The preventive detention could not be sustained because the authority's satisfaction was founded without considering crucial surrounding circumstances affecting the reliability of the confession.

Ratio Decidendi: In preventive detention, failure to place before the detaining authority material facts that may influence its decision, including facts bearing on the voluntariness or retraction of a confession, vitiates subjective satisfaction and renders the detention order illegal.

---