Preventive detention cannot rely on grounds from a quashed earlier order; fresh detention needs independent facts.

A fresh preventive detention order cannot validly rely, even in part, on the grounds of an earlier detention order that has been quashed by the High Court. Once quashed in writ jurisdiction, the earlier order stands nullified, and its grounds cannot form part of the material for the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction. A subsequent detention may be made after expiry or revocation of an earlier order, but it must rest on independent fresh facts. Because the authority admitted that the previous grounds were considered and supplied to the detenu, the later detention was vitiated and could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether a fresh preventive detention order could validly be founded, in part, on the grounds of an earlier detention order that had been quashed by the High Court.

Analysis: The detention law permitted a subsequent order after expiry or revocation of an earlier detention order, but the decision emphasised that fresh facts were required for the new order. A detention order quashed by the High Court under its writ jurisdiction stands nullified, and the earlier grounds cannot be relied upon either wholly or in part for forming the later subjective satisfaction. The detaining authority had expressly stated in the counter-affidavit that the previous grounds of detention were taken into consideration, and the earlier grounds were also part of the material supplied to the detenu. That made the earlier, quashed grounds part of the material used for the impugned order.

Conclusion: The detention order was vitiated because the authority relied on the grounds of the earlier quashed detention order while forming subjective satisfaction for the fresh detention.

Final Conclusion: The impugned detention could not be sustained in law and the detenu was entitled to release.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an earlier detention order has been quashed by a court, its grounds cannot be treated as material for a subsequent detention order, and any fresh detention must rest only on independent fresh facts.

---