https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104813 Where a detention order relies on a co-accused's confessional statement as substantive material, the connected retraction is a vital and relevant document that must also be placed before the detaining authority. Non-placement of that retraction vitiates the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction, and the order cannot be saved by severability when it rests on a single composite ground. The Supreme Court noted that earlier detention orders against the co-accused, passed months earlier, did not justify a presumption of continuing awareness in preventive detention matters. The detention order was therefore quashed and release was directed unless required in another case. en-us Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Nov 2015 13:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104813 Where a detention order relies on a co-accused's confessional statement as substantive material, the connected retraction is a vital and relevant document that must also be placed before the detaining authority. Non-placement of that retraction vitiates the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction, and the order cannot be saved by severability when it rests on a single composite ground. The Supreme Court noted that earlier detention orders against the co-accused, passed months earlier, did not justify a presumption of continuing awareness in preventive detention matters. The detention order was therefore quashed and release was directed unless required in another case. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104813