https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104986 Preventive detention under Article 22(5) requires prompt consideration of the detenu's representation, but no rigid time-limit applies, and short delay caused by normal postal transmission did not by itself vitiate the detention. Relevant and vital material likely to influence the detaining authority must be placed before it; the detenu's letter and the advocate's letter were material because they contained the detenu's version, including retraction and factual assertions, and their non-placement amounted to non-application of mind. On the likelihood of release on bail, the authority's satisfaction depends on the factual matrix and cannot be disturbed merely because bail had been rejected. The detention was quashed because omission of material invalidated the subjective satisfaction. en-us Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Jan 2026 17:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104986 Preventive detention under Article 22(5) requires prompt consideration of the detenu's representation, but no rigid time-limit applies, and short delay caused by normal postal transmission did not by itself vitiate the detention. Relevant and vital material likely to influence the detaining authority must be placed before it; the detenu's letter and the advocate's letter were material because they contained the detenu's version, including retraction and factual assertions, and their non-placement amounted to non-application of mind. On the likelihood of release on bail, the authority's satisfaction depends on the factual matrix and cannot be disturbed merely because bail had been rejected. The detention was quashed because omission of material invalidated the subjective satisfaction. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 14 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104986