https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182556 Unexplained delay in dealing with a detenue's representation was held to breach Article 22(5) because representations against preventive detention must be considered with promptitude. The sponsoring authority's comments were forwarded after nearly 28 days, and the explanation of postal delay was rejected as it was not pleaded in the counter and was unsupported by affidavit or adequate particulars. The inordinate, unexplained delay vitiated the detention order, and the writ petition was allowed with directions for release unless required in another case. en-us Tue, 22 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 May 2016 11:35:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182556 Unexplained delay in dealing with a detenue's representation was held to breach Article 22(5) because representations against preventive detention must be considered with promptitude. The sponsoring authority's comments were forwarded after nearly 28 days, and the explanation of postal delay was rejected as it was not pleaded in the counter and was unsupported by affidavit or adequate particulars. The inordinate, unexplained delay vitiated the detention order, and the writ petition was allowed with directions for release unless required in another case. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 22 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182556