https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165241 Article 22 and the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 require the appropriate Government to give a detenu an earliest opportunity to make a representation and to consider it independently of the Advisory Board. The duty to decide the representation is separate from the Board's advisory function, and it must be performed as early and expeditiously as possible because personal liberty is involved; no rigid time limit is prescribed. On the facts stated, the representation was not shown to have been considered promptly, the delay was inadequately explained, and the State appeared to have deferred decision until after the Board's opinion. The detention was therefore not sustainable. en-us Wed, 05 Nov 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Aug 2014 10:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165241 Article 22 and the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 require the appropriate Government to give a detenu an earliest opportunity to make a representation and to consider it independently of the Advisory Board. The duty to decide the representation is separate from the Board's advisory function, and it must be performed as early and expeditiously as possible because personal liberty is involved; no rigid time limit is prescribed. On the facts stated, the representation was not shown to have been considered promptly, the delay was inadequately explained, and the State appeared to have deferred decision until after the Board's opinion. The detention was therefore not sustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 05 Nov 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165241