https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235393 Preventive detention could not be sustained where the record did not establish incitement to disaffection, inducement to breach discipline, or any other statutory ingredient of the alleged offences. The material also failed to show that the appellant was a goonda or habitually engaged in prejudicial public-order activity under the preventive detention law. As the Advisory Board found no sufficient cause and the detention was revoked, the Court treated the respondents as having acted on unsupported facts and held that the detention and related criminal action amounted to abuse of power. Relief, including monetary compensation, was granted against the State for the wrongful detention. en-us Mon, 01 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235393 Preventive detention could not be sustained where the record did not establish incitement to disaffection, inducement to breach discipline, or any other statutory ingredient of the alleged offences. The material also failed to show that the appellant was a goonda or habitually engaged in prejudicial public-order activity under the preventive detention law. As the Advisory Board found no sufficient cause and the detention was revoked, the Court treated the respondents as having acted on unsupported facts and held that the detention and related criminal action amounted to abuse of power. Relief, including monetary compensation, was granted against the State for the wrongful detention. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 01 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235393