https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165146 Unexplained delay by the Central Government in considering a detenu's representation under Article 22(5) was treated as a breach of the constitutional safeguard of prompt consideration, and the preventive detention orders were held vitiated. The Court also rejected the technical objection that habeas corpus relief could be denied because the delay ground was not specifically pleaded or urged below, noting that the record showed it had been raised and that liberty-protective remedies in detention matters must not be defeated by procedural niceties. The detention was quashed and release directed unless the detenus were required in another case. en-us Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Oct 2015 19:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165146 Unexplained delay by the Central Government in considering a detenu's representation under Article 22(5) was treated as a breach of the constitutional safeguard of prompt consideration, and the preventive detention orders were held vitiated. The Court also rejected the technical objection that habeas corpus relief could be denied because the delay ground was not specifically pleaded or urged below, noting that the record showed it had been raised and that liberty-protective remedies in detention matters must not be defeated by procedural niceties. The detention was quashed and release directed unless the detenus were required in another case. Case-Laws FEMA Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165146