Supreme Court emphasizes prompt consideration of detenus' representations under Article 22(5)

The Supreme Court held that delays in considering a detenu's representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution can invalidate a detention under the National Security Act. The Court emphasized the constitutional imperative of promptly considering representations, rejecting the State's argument against applying this rule to such detentions. Unreasonable delays were found in the cases at hand, leading to the detenus' immediate release. The Court allowed the Writ Petitions and ordered the detenus to be released without delay.

---

---

Issues:
1. Whether delay in considering the representation made by a detenu under Article 22(5) of the Constitution vitiates a detention under the National Security Act and entitles the detenu to be released on that ground alone.

Comprehensive Analysis:
The judgment of the Supreme Court in this case revolves around the issue of whether a delay in considering a detenu's representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution can invalidate a detention under the National Security Act and lead to the detenu's release solely on that basis. The Court consolidated three Writ Petitions as the principal question argued in all cases was the same. The Court cited various precedents to establish that any unexplained delay in considering a detenu's representation can be fatal to the detention, emphasizing the need for expeditious consideration. The State's argument that such a rule was judge-made and should not apply to detentions under the National Security Act was rejected by the Court. The Court highlighted that the right and obligation to consider representations promptly are constitutional imperatives, not dependent on specific laws governing preventive detention. The Court emphasized that administrative delays or procedural complexities cannot justify infringing on a detenu's constitutional rights. In the cases at hand, the Court found unreasonable delays in considering the representations, leading to the detenus being entitled to immediate release. The Writ Petitions were allowed, and the detenus were ordered to be released forthwith.

---