https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173474 A preventive detention order can be sustained against a person already in judicial custody if the authority is aware of that custody, has cogent material showing a likely near-term release on bail, and records subjective satisfaction that detention is needed to prevent further prejudicial conduct. The detention was upheld because the grounds reflected awareness of custody, likelihood of release, and apprehension of continued smuggling activity. Consideration of the representation and reference to the Advisory Board were also found proper, as the substance of the allegations and retraction material had been considered. Delay in service did not vitiate detention, since the gap was explained by translation requirements. en-us Wed, 04 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 13:27:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173474 A preventive detention order can be sustained against a person already in judicial custody if the authority is aware of that custody, has cogent material showing a likely near-term release on bail, and records subjective satisfaction that detention is needed to prevent further prejudicial conduct. The detention was upheld because the grounds reflected awareness of custody, likelihood of release, and apprehension of continued smuggling activity. Consideration of the representation and reference to the Advisory Board were also found proper, as the substance of the allegations and retraction material had been considered. Delay in service did not vitiate detention, since the gap was explained by translation requirements. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173474