https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195657 A second writ petition under Article 226 challenging preventive detention is not maintainable where the earlier petition was fully heard and dismissed on merits, the later ground was available at that time, and no fresh facts, fresh evidence, or exceptional circumstance is shown. Successive petitions are permissible only when a new ground arises after the first decision or where an earlier omission is otherwise justified. A mere additional facet or argument on an existing ground does not justify reopening the matter, and finality in such proceedings must be preserved. en-us Fri, 12 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Nov 2017 10:56:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195657 A second writ petition under Article 226 challenging preventive detention is not maintainable where the earlier petition was fully heard and dismissed on merits, the later ground was available at that time, and no fresh facts, fresh evidence, or exceptional circumstance is shown. Successive petitions are permissible only when a new ground arises after the first decision or where an earlier omission is otherwise justified. A mere additional facet or argument on an existing ground does not justify reopening the matter, and finality in such proceedings must be preserved. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 12 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195657