<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1986 (2) TMI 334 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162508</link>
    <description>A preventive detention order is invalid if the detaining authority forms subjective satisfaction without all relevant material before it. Where retractions from confessional statements and bail proceedings were not placed before the authority, the decision could not rest on full and relevant facts, even if those documents had been considered earlier in administrative processing. The omission vitiated the detention for non-application of mind, and the detenu was entitled to release.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2014 12:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (2) TMI 334 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162508</link>
      <description>A preventive detention order is invalid if the detaining authority forms subjective satisfaction without all relevant material before it. Where retractions from confessional statements and bail proceedings were not placed before the authority, the decision could not rest on full and relevant facts, even if those documents had been considered earlier in administrative processing. The omission vitiated the detention for non-application of mind, and the detenu was entitled to release.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162508</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>