As per the case facts, the appellant was detained under the PIT NDPS Act, and the High Court rejected a writ application challenging the detention order, affirming it. The appeal ... questioned the legality and validity of this detention order. The question arose whether the preventive detention order was valid, especially given that the fact of the detenu's bail in other criminal cases was not brought to the detaining authority's notice. Finally, the Supreme Court found that a crucial fact—the appellant's release on bail by the Special Court despite the strictness of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985—was withheld from the detaining authority, which was led to believe that the trials were pending. The Court emphasized that preventive detention is a serious invasion of personal liberty and safeguards must be strictly adhered to. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment and the preventive detention order, and ordered the appellant's immediate release if not required in any other case.