https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80955 Preventive detention under COFEPOSA is not invalid merely because the detenu's representation is considered after confirmation of detention. Article 22(5) requires the Government to consider a representation independently, expeditiously, and with an unbiased mind, but neither the Constitution nor the Act mandates that such consideration must precede confirmation. The duty to decide the representation is distinct from the Advisory Board's function under Article 22(4) and the statutory confirmation process. A prompt, separate consideration is mandatory, and delay must not be unexplained, but post-confirmation consideration by itself does not vitiate the detention or the confirmation. en-us Wed, 23 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Jul 2014 12:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80955 Preventive detention under COFEPOSA is not invalid merely because the detenu's representation is considered after confirmation of detention. Article 22(5) requires the Government to consider a representation independently, expeditiously, and with an unbiased mind, but neither the Constitution nor the Act mandates that such consideration must precede confirmation. The duty to decide the representation is distinct from the Advisory Board's function under Article 22(4) and the statutory confirmation process. A prompt, separate consideration is mandatory, and delay must not be unexplained, but post-confirmation consideration by itself does not vitiate the detention or the confirmation. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 23 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80955