Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Preventive Detention Laws

In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court reiterated that preventive detention laws, though constitutionally permitted, are exceptional measures and must be applied with strict adherence to constitutional safeguards. The Court emphasised that any deprivation of personal liberty must satisfy the requirements of Articles 21 and 22, including procedural fairness, timely communication of grounds of detention, and the right to representation. It cautioned authorities against mechanical or routine use of preventive detention in the name of national security or public order.

Key constitutional principles highlighted

• Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty):
  Any detention must follow a procedure that is just, fair and reasonable, not arbitrary.
• Article 22 (Safeguards against Preventive Detention):
  Mandates timely disclosure of detention grounds, opportunity to make representation, and review by an Advisory Board.
• Judicial scrutiny:
  Courts retain the power to examine procedural lapses, mala fide intent, and non-application of mind by the detaining authority.

Broader implications

The judgment strengthens constitutional morality by balancing state security concerns with individual freedoms. It sends a clear signal that national security cannot be invoked to dilute fundamental rights without due process.