TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the preventive detention order was vitiated because the detaining authority failed to consider relevant material, namely the bail applications, pre-charge evidence and the order on charge in the pending prosecution.
Analysis: A detention order based on subjective satisfaction is valid only if the detaining authority considers all material and vital facts that may influence its decision. Where prosecution has already been launched, the pendency and the record of that prosecution are relevant circumstances and must be placed before and considered by the detaining authority. The bail applications, the pre-charge evidence and the order on charge were all capable of affecting the decision whether preventive detention was necessary. Non-consideration of the bail orders was particularly significant because the petitioners were facing prosecution and had not been enlarged on bail. Failure to consider such relevant material amounted to non-application of mind and vitiated the subjective satisfaction.
Conclusion: The detention order was invalid and liable to be quashed for non-consideration of relevant material.
Ratio Decidendi: Preventive detention is illegal if the detaining authority does not consider material or vital facts that may influence its subjective satisfaction, including relevant records of a pending prosecution.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
