Preventive detention order upheld where disjunctive statutory grounds caused no uncertainty and mala fides was unsupported by record.

A preventive detention order was not invalid merely because it used the disjunctive expression "security of the State or the maintenance of public order," since the wording did not by itself create uncertainty or show lack of application of mind where the order was referable to statutory power. The challenge of mala fides also failed because the record contained no material supporting such an inference. The detention order was therefore upheld and the habeas corpus petition dismissed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the detention order was invalid because it used the expression "security of the State or the maintenance of public order". (ii) Whether the detention order was liable to be quashed on the ground of mala fides.

Issue (i): Whether the detention order was invalid because it used the expression "security of the State or the maintenance of public order".

Analysis: The detention order was challenged as showing casualness and absence of due application of mind on the footing that the disjunctive expression created uncertainty as to the ground of detention. The same expression had already been considered in the connected matter decided the same day. The use of the word "or" did not, by itself, make the order uncertain or infirm where the detention was referable to the statutory power.

Conclusion: The detention order was not invalid on this ground.

Issue (ii): Whether the detention order was liable to be quashed on the ground of mala fides.

Analysis: The challenge of mala fides was raised, but the record disclosed no material from which such an inference could be drawn. In the absence of supporting material, the allegation could not be accepted.

Conclusion: The detention order was not shown to be mala fide.

Final Conclusion: The petition failed and the detention order was upheld, resulting in dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.

Ratio Decidendi: A preventive detention order is not vitiated merely because it uses the disjunctive expression indicating the statutory grounds, and a plea of mala fides must be supported by material on record.

---