https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182832 Preventive detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act was not invalidated merely because the alleged conduct could also amount to ordinary criminal offences or because the grounds related to public order. Preventive detention is distinct from punitive prosecution, and the existence of criminal proceedings does not by itself bar detention; the court also declined to interfere with the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction in the absence of mala fides or constitutional infirmity. However, a second representation based on fresh material had to be considered afresh under the statutory scheme, and the Government could seek the Advisory Board's opinion again where appropriate. The detention was upheld, but prompt consideration of the later representation was directed. en-us Fri, 20 Dec 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 May 2016 15:19:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182832 Preventive detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act was not invalidated merely because the alleged conduct could also amount to ordinary criminal offences or because the grounds related to public order. Preventive detention is distinct from punitive prosecution, and the existence of criminal proceedings does not by itself bar detention; the court also declined to interfere with the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction in the absence of mala fides or constitutional infirmity. However, a second representation based on fresh material had to be considered afresh under the statutory scheme, and the Government could seek the Advisory Board's opinion again where appropriate. The detention was upheld, but prompt consideration of the later representation was directed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Dec 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182832