Stale grounds cannot justify preventive detention where delay breaks the live nexus needed for valid satisfaction.

Preventive detention cannot be sustained on grounds that are stale or too remote to support the required subjective satisfaction. The Court noted that the detention was based on incidents from August 1971, while the order was made in March 1972, with no explanation for the delay. Because preventive detention requires a real and proximate nexus between the past conduct relied on and the necessity for detention, the substantial lapse of time made the grounds insufficient. The detention order was therefore invalidated and the petition succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention order was invalid because the grounds relied upon were too stale and remote to sustain the requisite satisfaction for preventive detention.

Analysis: The detention was founded on three incidents occurring in August 1971, while the order was made in March 1972. The grounds showed that the conduct relied upon was several months old, and no explanation was offered for the long delay in passing the order. In preventive detention matters, the authority must be reasonably satisfied that detention is necessary to prevent prejudicial activity, and that satisfaction must rest on grounds having a real and proximate connection with the necessity for detention. On the facts, the delay was so substantial that the incidents could not reasonably justify detention at that later stage.

Conclusion: The detention order was invalid and the petition succeeded.

Final Conclusion: The order of preventive detention was quashed because the stale and delayed grounds could not sustain a valid preventive satisfaction.

Ratio Decidendi: Preventive detention based on stale incidents, without a satisfactory explanation for delay, cannot sustain the requisite reasonable satisfaction because the grounds must have a live and proximate nexus with the need for detention.

---