Preventive detention grounds must be formed on complete material; piecemeal consideration vitiates the detention order.

Preventive detention requires the detaining authority to form subjective satisfaction on the basis of all relevant material considered together before finalising the grounds. Where draft grounds were prepared before additional documents were received and no fresh review or re-formulation followed, the process amounted to impermissible piecemeal consideration of material. The detention order was therefore invalid because the authority's satisfaction was vitiated by incomplete and phased assessment of the record.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention order was vitiated because the detaining authority formed the grounds on incomplete material and did not re-formulate them after receiving the additional documents and information.

Analysis: The detention order had to rest on a subjective satisfaction formed on the basis of all relevant material considered together at one time. The record showed that the detaining authority sought further documents, prepared draft grounds before the additional material was received, and then issued the order without any fresh review or re-formulation after the later documents came in. Such piecemeal consideration of material was impermissible and could not sustain preventive detention.

Conclusion: The detention order was invalid because the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority stood vitiated.

Ratio Decidendi: In preventive detention, the grounds must be formulated only after considering the complete material together, and a detention order based on piecemeal or phased consideration of documents is bad in law.

---