https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179565 Preventive detention safeguards were held to require real diligence, but the Court found no vitiating illegality where a one-day delay in forwarding the detenu's representation caused no prejudice and was promptly cured before hearing. The Advisory Board was not expected to write a judicial-style judgment, and there was no basis to infer that it ignored the detenu's documentary material. The State Government's confirmation was not invalid because the relevant grounds and materials were before it, and the missing full Board record caused no shown prejudice. Non-supply of confidential intelligence reports did not breach the detenu's right of representation because the material particulars were disclosed. The detention was upheld and the High Court's quashing was set aside. en-us Wed, 01 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Mar 2016 12:05:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179565 Preventive detention safeguards were held to require real diligence, but the Court found no vitiating illegality where a one-day delay in forwarding the detenu's representation caused no prejudice and was promptly cured before hearing. The Advisory Board was not expected to write a judicial-style judgment, and there was no basis to infer that it ignored the detenu's documentary material. The State Government's confirmation was not invalid because the relevant grounds and materials were before it, and the missing full Board record caused no shown prejudice. Non-supply of confidential intelligence reports did not breach the detenu's right of representation because the material particulars were disclosed. The detention was upheld and the High Court's quashing was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 01 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179565