https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305164 In preventive detention matters, Article 22(5) requires the appropriate Government to consider the detenu's representation independently and with expedition, and it cannot defer that decision until the Advisory Board acts. Unexplained delay in deciding the representation therefore vitiates the detention. The constitutional safeguard is also incomplete unless the rejection is communicated promptly to the detenu; mere decision-making is not enough. Because the representation was delayed without valid justification and its rejection was not shown to have been duly communicated, the detention could not be sustained. en-us Fri, 29 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 May 2026 12:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305164 In preventive detention matters, Article 22(5) requires the appropriate Government to consider the detenu's representation independently and with expedition, and it cannot defer that decision until the Advisory Board acts. Unexplained delay in deciding the representation therefore vitiates the detention. The constitutional safeguard is also incomplete unless the rejection is communicated promptly to the detenu; mere decision-making is not enough. Because the representation was delayed without valid justification and its rejection was not shown to have been duly communicated, the detention could not be sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305164