https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175303 A preventive detention order was held invalid because the detaining authority recorded the incident time as 1800 hours even though the relied-upon materials, including the FIR and mahazars, showed that the incident occurred at 6.00 a.m. The mismatch was treated as a substantive inconsistency, not a mere typographical error, because the record as a whole contradicted the authority's assumption that the event happened in the evening. The order was therefore vitiated by non-application of mind and quashed. en-us Mon, 27 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Nov 2015 09:58:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175303 A preventive detention order was held invalid because the detaining authority recorded the incident time as 1800 hours even though the relied-upon materials, including the FIR and mahazars, showed that the incident occurred at 6.00 a.m. The mismatch was treated as a substantive inconsistency, not a mere typographical error, because the record as a whole contradicted the authority's assumption that the event happened in the evening. The order was therefore vitiated by non-application of mind and quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 27 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175303