Preventive detention in custody requires real bail likelihood and cogent material; speculative apprehension is not enough.

Preventive detention of a person already in custody is permissible only where the detaining authority shows awareness of the custody and relies on cogent, reliable material indicating a real likelihood of release on bail. It must also be shown that release would probably lead to prejudicial activity and that detention is necessary to prevent it. A bare reference to bail in other matters, without particulars, a pending bail application, or comparable bail granted to similarly placed co-accused, is insufficient. On the stated facts, the apprehension of release was speculative, so the detention order was unsustainable and was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a preventive detention order against a person already in custody can be sustained in the absence of cogent material showing a real possibility of release on bail and consequent prejudicial activity.

Analysis: Preventive detention of a person already in custody is not prohibited in law, but the detaining authority must show awareness of the existing custody and must rely on reliable material indicating a real possibility of release on bail. The material must also support the inference that, if released, the detenu would probably indulge in prejudicial activities and that detention is necessary to prevent such conduct. A bare or general reference to bail in other matters, without particulars and without connection to the same case or similarly placed co-accused, is insufficient. If no bail application is pending and no co-accused in the same offence has been enlarged on bail on comparable footing, the apprehension of release remains speculative and the detention order is vitiated.

Conclusion: The detention order was unsustainable because it rested on mere ipse dixit and lacked the requisite cogent material to justify detention of a person already in custody.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed, the detention order was quashed, and the challenge to preventive detention succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: A detention order against a person already in custody is valid only if the detaining authority has reliable material showing a real likelihood of release on bail and a consequent necessity to detain him; a speculative or unsupported apprehension is insufficient.

---