Preventive detention in custody requires objective material showing likely bail and likely prejudicial activity; bare apprehension is insufficient.

Preventive detention under the National Security Act can be made against a person already in custody, but only where the record contains cogent material showing a real likelihood of release on bail and a consequent likelihood of prejudicial activity. A bare assertion that bail may be granted is insufficient. On the facts recorded, the detention order failed because there was no objective material supporting a genuine prospect of release or the need for continued detention to prevent harm to public order, and it was therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a detention order under the National Security Act, 1980 could be sustained against a person already in custody merely on the ground that he was trying to obtain bail and there was a possibility of his release.

Analysis: Preventive detention is not barred merely because the person is already in custody, but the validity of such an order depends on the facts of each case. Where detention is based on the prospect of release on bail, the record must disclose cogent material or credible information showing that the detenu is likely to be released and, if released, is likely to act in a manner prejudicial to public order. A bare or bald assertion that the detenu may come out on bail is not enough; the detaining authority must have material justifying the necessity of preventive detention despite existing custody.

Conclusion: The detention order could not be sustained on the basis recorded, as there was no material showing a real likelihood of release on bail coupled with prejudicial activity.

Final Conclusion: The preventive detention was held unsustainable because the order rested only on an unsubstantiated apprehension of bail and lacked the requisite factual foundation.

Ratio Decidendi: A preventive detention order against a person already in custody requires objective material showing both a real likelihood of release on bail and a consequent need for detention to prevent prejudicial activity; a mere possibility of bail is insufficient.

---