Article 22(5) requires prompt independent consideration of a detenu's representation; postponement pending Advisory Board report violates constitutional safeguards.

A detenu's representation under Article 22(5) must be considered by the State Government independently and with urgency. The Government's duty to apply its own judgment on the representation is separate from the Advisory Board's function, so consideration cannot be deferred merely because the matter has been referred to the Board. Where the representation was kept pending until receipt of the Advisory Board's report, the constitutional safeguard was breached and the detention was vitiated; the detention order was set aside and release directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention order was vitiated because the detenu's representation was kept pending by the State Government until receipt of the Advisory Board's report, contrary to Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The constitutional safeguard under Article 22(5) requires the detaining authority and the State Government to afford the earliest opportunity of representation and to consider that representation expeditiously. The obligation of the Government to consider the representation is independent of the Advisory Board's function and cannot be deferred merely because the case has been referred to the Board. The judgments relied upon established that the Government must apply its own judgment on the representation and that unexplained postponement of consideration pending the Advisory Board's opinion breaches the constitutional mandate.

Conclusion: The representation having been received by the State Government after referral to the Advisory Board was unlawfully kept pending until the Board's report was received. This violated Article 22(5) and vitiated the detention; the issue is answered in favour of the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The detention order could not stand and was set aside, with consequential release directed.

Ratio Decidendi: A detenu's representation under Article 22(5) must be considered by the Government independently and with urgency, and it cannot be postponed merely because the matter is pending before the Advisory Board.

---