https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171510 A detention order depriving personal liberty must reflect genuine application of mind and the detaining authority's proper satisfaction under the statute. Here, although the order stated six grounds in language closely tracking the statutory grounds, the supporting affidavit referred only to two grounds and did not show that each ground had been independently considered. The discrepancy, together with the disjunctive wording used in the order, indicated that the authority had merely reproduced the statutory language instead of assessing the real necessity for detention. The Supreme Court held the detention order invalid for lack of proper application of mind and genuine satisfaction, and the detainee was entitled to release. en-us Fri, 17 Dec 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:28:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171510 A detention order depriving personal liberty must reflect genuine application of mind and the detaining authority's proper satisfaction under the statute. Here, although the order stated six grounds in language closely tracking the statutory grounds, the supporting affidavit referred only to two grounds and did not show that each ground had been independently considered. The discrepancy, together with the disjunctive wording used in the order, indicated that the authority had merely reproduced the statutory language instead of assessing the real necessity for detention. The Supreme Court held the detention order invalid for lack of proper application of mind and genuine satisfaction, and the detainee was entitled to release. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 17 Dec 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171510