https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310087 Preventive detention was sustained where the detaining authority had sufficient material, including co-accused statements and connected records, to reach subjective satisfaction, and additional items claimed by the detenu were not shown to be necessary. Delay in execution did not break the live link because the detenu's own evasive conduct explained the delay. The representation challenge also failed since the Government's representation, decision, and para-wise comments were placed before the Advisory Board in substance. Non-supply of requested documents did not vitiate detention because the materials were either not relied on or not shown to be relevant and necessary for an effective representation under Article 22(5). en-us Tue, 24 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Oct 2023 08:20:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310087 Preventive detention was sustained where the detaining authority had sufficient material, including co-accused statements and connected records, to reach subjective satisfaction, and additional items claimed by the detenu were not shown to be necessary. Delay in execution did not break the live link because the detenu's own evasive conduct explained the delay. The representation challenge also failed since the Government's representation, decision, and para-wise comments were placed before the Advisory Board in substance. Non-supply of requested documents did not vitiate detention because the materials were either not relied on or not shown to be relevant and necessary for an effective representation under Article 22(5). Case-Laws Customs Tue, 24 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310087