https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458001 A preventive detention order was held invalid where the detaining authority's wording suggested non-application of mind and casualness in recording subjective satisfaction. The Court noted that, when detention is based on multiple connected activities, the order must clearly reflect the basis for detention; the use of the disjunctive "or" instead of "and" could indicate mechanical reproduction of statutory language and uncertainty in the authority's mind. Because such equivocal drafting may prejudice the detenue's right to make an effective representation, the detention order could not be sustained and was quashed. en-us Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Oct 2024 11:10:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458001 A preventive detention order was held invalid where the detaining authority's wording suggested non-application of mind and casualness in recording subjective satisfaction. The Court noted that, when detention is based on multiple connected activities, the order must clearly reflect the basis for detention; the use of the disjunctive "or" instead of "and" could indicate mechanical reproduction of statutory language and uncertainty in the authority's mind. Because such equivocal drafting may prejudice the detenue's right to make an effective representation, the detention order could not be sustained and was quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458001