https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282044 Preventive detention of a person already in custody is valid where the detaining authority is aware of the custody, has reliable material to believe release on bail is likely, and records satisfaction that release would probably lead to prejudicial activity; the order was upheld on that basis. Non-supply of auxiliary statements and supporting materials did not vitiate detention because the supplied FIRs disclosed the real basis of the detention and no prejudice to representation was shown. Service of the grounds within the statutory period satisfied the communication requirement, and omission to mention a separate right to represent to the detaining authority did not invalidate the detention under the Tamil Nadu Act. en-us Fri, 04 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jul 2019 10:29:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282044 Preventive detention of a person already in custody is valid where the detaining authority is aware of the custody, has reliable material to believe release on bail is likely, and records satisfaction that release would probably lead to prejudicial activity; the order was upheld on that basis. Non-supply of auxiliary statements and supporting materials did not vitiate detention because the supplied FIRs disclosed the real basis of the detention and no prejudice to representation was shown. Service of the grounds within the statutory period satisfied the communication requirement, and omission to mention a separate right to represent to the detaining authority did not invalidate the detention under the Tamil Nadu Act. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282044