https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74170 Preventive detention was quashed because refusal to examine the detenu's witnesses before the Advisory Board denied an effective opportunity of representation under Article 22(4). The witnesses were offered to establish that the seized currency was accounted for and to rebut the detention grounds. A detenu may adduce oral and documentary rebuttal evidence before the Advisory Board, and that material may influence the Government's decision whether to confirm detention, notwithstanding an Advisory Board opinion favouring detention. Unjustified refusal to receive such evidence vitiates continued detention, requiring release. en-us Tue, 26 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 11:58:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74170 Preventive detention was quashed because refusal to examine the detenu's witnesses before the Advisory Board denied an effective opportunity of representation under Article 22(4). The witnesses were offered to establish that the seized currency was accounted for and to rebut the detention grounds. A detenu may adduce oral and documentary rebuttal evidence before the Advisory Board, and that material may influence the Government's decision whether to confirm detention, notwithstanding an Advisory Board opinion favouring detention. Unjustified refusal to receive such evidence vitiates continued detention, requiring release. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 26 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74170