PREVENTIVE DETENTION AND CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS IN INDIA: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE 22 AND ITS CONTEMPORARY RELEVANCE

AUTHORS – KRITI MISHRA* & DR. KAVYA CHANDEL**

* STUDENT AT AMITY UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA

** ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AT AMITY UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA

BEST CITATION – KRITI MISHRA & DR. KAVYA CHANDEL, PREVENTIVE DETENTION AND CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS IN INDIA: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE 22 AND ITS CONTEMPORARY RELEVANCE, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (1) OF 2026, PG.786-792, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

This research paper critically examines the concept of preventive detention in India and the constitutional safeguards provided under Article 22. Preventive detention allows the State to detain a person without trial in order to prevent potential threats to national security and public order and the overall stability of society. While such a power may be necessary in certain situations, it also raises serious concerns about protection of personal liberty and the possibility of arbitrary action. The paper explores the historical roots of preventive detention that trace back to the colonial period. It Further examines the legal provision related to preventive detention and the statues enacted by legislature to address emerging challenges to national security and peace. special emphasis is placed on Article 22 which attempts to strike a balance between individual rights and State interests by providing certain procedural safeguards even in cases of detention without trial. The paper also analyses the role of the judiciary in interpreting and protecting fundamental rights in preventive detention cases. Through judicial review, courts have played a crucial role in ensuring that such powers are exercised within constitutional limits and not used arbitrarily. At the same time, the study addresses concerns regarding the misuse of preventive detention laws, particularly during periods of political unrest and emergency. By examining its contemporary relevance, this paper highlights the continuing tension between collective security and individual freedom. It concludes that while preventive detention remains an important legal tool, its exercise must be guided by constitutional principles, transparency, and strict judicial supervision to safeguard democratic values and personal liberty.