https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196578 Preventive detention was upheld where mala fides were not established from the material before the authority, and an alleged electoral motive was insufficient on its own to invalidate the orders. The fact that several detention orders were issued on the same day did not show non-application of mind, because the Government maintained that each case was individually considered and the relevant papers were before it. Cancellation of an earlier detention order and issuance of a fresh order on the same day was also held lawful, since the controlling question in habeas corpus was whether valid detention was in force when the petitions were heard. en-us Wed, 27 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Dec 2017 18:52:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196578 Preventive detention was upheld where mala fides were not established from the material before the authority, and an alleged electoral motive was insufficient on its own to invalidate the orders. The fact that several detention orders were issued on the same day did not show non-application of mind, because the Government maintained that each case was individually considered and the relevant papers were before it. Cancellation of an earlier detention order and issuance of a fresh order on the same day was also held lawful, since the controlling question in habeas corpus was whether valid detention was in force when the petitions were heard. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 27 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196578