As per case facts, the detenu was arrested and subsequently placed under preventive detention under the National Security Act. He submitted a representation to the detaining authority, explicitly asking for ... copies to be forwarded to both the State and Central Governments. However, the detaining authority admittedly failed to do so, and this initial representation was not presented to the Advisory Board. The detenu later sent another representation which was rejected by the State and Central Governments. The question arose whether the detaining authority's failure to forward the detenu's first representation as requested, and the Advisory Board's subsequent non-consideration of it, violated the detenu's constitutional right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) and the statutory provisions of the National Security Act. Finally, the court ruled that the detaining authority's actions constituted a clear infraction of the detenu's sacrosanct constitutional rights. The detenu was misled by the stated procedure, and the court emphasized that there is no limitation period for a detenu to submit a representation, making any fixed timeframes for such submissions invalid. Consequently, the impugned preventive detention order and all related approvals were set aside, and the detenu was ordered to be released.