https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277841 Article 22(5) requires a detaining authority to consider a detenu's representation promptly and without unexplained delay, because the right to make an effective representation is a constitutional safeguard against deprivation of personal liberty without trial. Where the representation remains pending for an undue period and no satisfactory explanation is offered, the delay vitiates the detention. On the facts stated, a 27-day delay in considering and rejecting the representation was left unexplained, and no further affidavit justified it, so the detention was invalidated. en-us Tue, 30 May 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Dec 2018 12:53:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277841 Article 22(5) requires a detaining authority to consider a detenu's representation promptly and without unexplained delay, because the right to make an effective representation is a constitutional safeguard against deprivation of personal liberty without trial. Where the representation remains pending for an undue period and no satisfactory explanation is offered, the delay vitiates the detention. On the facts stated, a 27-day delay in considering and rejecting the representation was left unexplained, and no further affidavit justified it, so the detention was invalidated. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 30 May 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277841