https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170982 Preventive detention grounds must be communicated clearly enough to enable an effective representation under Article 22(5); mere vagueness that deprives the detenue of a real opportunity to object would be invalid. Further particulars may be supplied later if they only clarify the same communicated ground and do not introduce a new basis of satisfaction. Applying that principle, the later material in this case was treated as supplementary, not fresh grounds, so the constitutional safeguard was found complied with and the detention was upheld. en-us Thu, 25 Jan 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jul 2015 17:51:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170982 Preventive detention grounds must be communicated clearly enough to enable an effective representation under Article 22(5); mere vagueness that deprives the detenue of a real opportunity to object would be invalid. Further particulars may be supplied later if they only clarify the same communicated ground and do not introduce a new basis of satisfaction. Applying that principle, the later material in this case was treated as supplementary, not fresh grounds, so the constitutional safeguard was found complied with and the detention was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 25 Jan 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170982