https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175318 Preventive detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act is not barred merely because the same facts may also support proceedings under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The two regimes operate in different fields: criminal proceedings require proof of objective facts, while preventive detention rests on the authority's subjective satisfaction about past conduct and the likelihood of future prejudicial activity. In habeas corpus review, the court does not re-examine disputed factual denials or an alibi where the detaining authority has considered relevant material and the factual foundation is not shown to be absent. The detention was therefore upheld. en-us Tue, 01 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:09:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175318 Preventive detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act is not barred merely because the same facts may also support proceedings under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The two regimes operate in different fields: criminal proceedings require proof of objective facts, while preventive detention rests on the authority's subjective satisfaction about past conduct and the likelihood of future prejudicial activity. In habeas corpus review, the court does not re-examine disputed factual denials or an alibi where the detaining authority has considered relevant material and the factual foundation is not shown to be absent. The detention was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175318