Preventive detention and effective representation fail when material particulars relied on are withheld from the detenu.

Preventive detention is constitutionally defective where the detaining authority relies on adverse material and background particulars that are not communicated to the detenu, because the omission denies an effective representation under Article 22(5). The safeguard requires disclosure of all material particulars forming part of the subjective satisfaction, unless the non-disclosure is justified within the constitutional exception under Article 22(6). Where the communicated grounds are incomplete or vague for want of such disclosure, the detention cannot stand and is vitiated for breach of the right to make a meaningful representation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention orders were vitiated because all material particulars forming the basis of the grounds were not communicated to the detenus, thereby denying them an effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.

Analysis: The detention orders were founded not merely on the solitary grounds conveyed to the detenus, but also on additional adverse material and background information describing them as habitual or veteran offenders. Those further particulars were relied upon in the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority, yet they were not disclosed to the detenus and were not shown to be protected by any claim under Article 22(6). In preventive detention matters, the safeguards in the Constitution and the statute must be strictly observed, and the detenu must receive the material particulars necessary to make a meaningful and effective representation. Failure to communicate such particulars renders the communicated grounds vague and constitutionally defective.

Conclusion: The detention orders were invalid for breach of Article 22(5) because the detenus were not supplied with all material particulars necessary for an effective representation.

Ratio Decidendi: In preventive detention, non-communication of material particulars relied upon by the detaining authority, when not justified under the constitutional exception, vitiates the detention for denial of the right to make an effective representation.

---