https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277406 Preventive detention under the Preventive Detention Act was challenged on mala fides and alleged abuse of power where a criminal investigation on substantially the same facts was already pending and bail had been granted. The Court accepted that pendency or imminent prosecution is a relevant factor when testing bona fides, and that mala fides and executive abuse are justiciable grounds under Article 226. It also noted that preventive detention may affect judicial investigation. On the material then available, however, the Court was not satisfied that mala fides was established or that interference was warranted before the statutory Board considered the matter and wider materials. en-us Thu, 03 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Dec 2018 16:25:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277406 Preventive detention under the Preventive Detention Act was challenged on mala fides and alleged abuse of power where a criminal investigation on substantially the same facts was already pending and bail had been granted. The Court accepted that pendency or imminent prosecution is a relevant factor when testing bona fides, and that mala fides and executive abuse are justiciable grounds under Article 226. It also noted that preventive detention may affect judicial investigation. On the material then available, however, the Court was not satisfied that mala fides was established or that interference was warranted before the statutory Board considered the matter and wider materials. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 03 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277406