https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100561 In preventive detention matters, non-disclosure is permissible only when the detaining authority consciously concludes that disclosure of the relevant material would be against public interest. Where detention is based on witness statements, withholding only the witnesses' names and addresses does not justify suppressing the contents of those statements unless their disclosure itself has been considered objectionable on public interest grounds. As the statements were relied upon for detention and were not supplied, the detenu was deprived of material needed for an effective representation under Article 22(5). The detention order was therefore vitiated and quashed, and release was directed if the detenu was not otherwise required. en-us Wed, 21 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100561 In preventive detention matters, non-disclosure is permissible only when the detaining authority consciously concludes that disclosure of the relevant material would be against public interest. Where detention is based on witness statements, withholding only the witnesses' names and addresses does not justify suppressing the contents of those statements unless their disclosure itself has been considered objectionable on public interest grounds. As the statements were relied upon for detention and were not supplied, the detenu was deprived of material needed for an effective representation under Article 22(5). The detention order was therefore vitiated and quashed, and release was directed if the detenu was not otherwise required. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100561