Preventive detention representations must be dealt with promptly; unexplained delay vitiates the detention order.

Unexplained and avoidable delay in considering a detenu's representation against preventive detention violates the of prompt, continuous, and expeditious disposal. Where the counter-affidavit showed that comments were sought through departmental channels and the representation remained pending without satisfactory explanation for the time taken, the administrative approach was inconsistent with the heightened protection of personal liberty in preventive detention matters. The detention order was therefore vitiated and quashed, and release was directed forthwith if the petitioners were not otherwise required in custody.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention order was liable to be quashed on the ground that the representation against preventive detention was not disposed of with utmost expedition.

Analysis: The detention was challenged on the footing that the representation made by the detenus remained pending for an unreasonable period. The materials in the counter-affidavit showed that after receipt of the representation, comments were called for through departmental channels and there was avoidable delay at different stages, without a satisfactory explanation for the time taken. In matters of preventive detention, where personal liberty is in jeopardy, a representation must be dealt with continuously and with the utmost expedition until a final decision is reached and communicated. The unexplained delay in processing the representation showed a leisurely administrative approach inconsistent with that obligation.

Conclusion: The detention order was vitiated and liable to be quashed in favour of the petitioners.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, the detention was set aside, and release was directed forthwith if the petitioners were not otherwise required in custody.

Ratio Decidendi: In preventive detention matters, unexplained and avoidable delay in disposing of a detenu's representation violates the requirement of prompt and continuous consideration and renders the detention unsustainable.

---