https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180858 Preventive detention orders are not invalid merely because the authority repeats earlier grounds, if prior conduct and custody context still justify genuine satisfaction for detention in the interest of public order. However, the grounds must be communicated within a reasonable time and with sufficient specificity to enable an effective representation; highly vague grounds, coupled with inordinate delay in supplying essential particulars, defeat the constitutional safeguard. Additional particulars cannot be used to cure an already defective basis after the detenu's opportunity to object has been impaired. The detention was therefore unsustainable where prompt, specific grounds were not furnished. en-us Fri, 23 Feb 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Apr 2016 18:28:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180858 Preventive detention orders are not invalid merely because the authority repeats earlier grounds, if prior conduct and custody context still justify genuine satisfaction for detention in the interest of public order. However, the grounds must be communicated within a reasonable time and with sufficient specificity to enable an effective representation; highly vague grounds, coupled with inordinate delay in supplying essential particulars, defeat the constitutional safeguard. Additional particulars cannot be used to cure an already defective basis after the detenu's opportunity to object has been impaired. The detention was therefore unsustainable where prompt, specific grounds were not furnished. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 23 Feb 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180858