Preventive detention under Jammu and Kashmir law remained valid despite no communicated section 14 decision to the detenue.

Article 22(4) permits preventive detention beyond three months only within the limits of clause (7), as adapted for Jammu and Kashmir. Section 14 of the Jammu and Kashmir Preventive Detention Act was treated as an enabling provision that allowed continued detention without reference to an Advisory Board in the specified circumstances, and it did not require a formal order. The Government had decided within the relevant period to proceed under section 14 after consultation, and there was no statutory duty to communicate that decision to the detenue. On that basis, non-communication did not invalidate the detention, and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether detention under the Jammu and Kashmir Preventive Detention Act became illegal because no order under section 14 was made before the expiry of three months from the detention order, and whether the Government's decision to proceed under that provision had to be communicated to the detenue.

Analysis: Article 22(4) of the Constitution permits preventive detention beyond three months only in the circumstances contemplated by clause (7), as adapted for Jammu and Kashmir. Section 14 of the Jammu and Kashmir Preventive Detention Act did not require a formal order; it only enabled continued detention without reference to an Advisory Board in the specified cases. The record showed that the Government had, within the relevant period, decided to deal with the detenue under section 14 after consultation, and there was no statutory requirement that such a decision be communicated to the detenue. The absence of communication did not affect the legality of the detention.

Conclusion: The challenge to the continued detention failed, and the petition was dismissed.

---