Coercion And Constitutional Safeguards: Preventive Detention Under Article 22 And Forced Labour Under Article 23
Tuba Khusro, BA LLB, Manikchand Pahade Law College, Maharashtra
ABSTRACT
This paper studies preventive detention under Article 22 of the Constitution of India and sets it beside Article 23, which prohibits trafficking, begar, and other forms of forced labour. It asks whether the Article 22 safeguards, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, constrain executive detention without trial, and what Article 23 adds to an account of constitutional protection against coercion. The method is doctrinal analysis of the constitutional text, the National Security Act, 1980, reported Supreme Court judgments, and selected statutes, with short examples drawn from hypothetical facts. The central finding is that Article 22 both authorizes and limits preventive detention. Grounds must be communicated promptly, the detainee must have a real opportunity to represent, the Advisory Board must review the case, and the courts remain available to test legality. Article 23 operates separately and can reach private exploitation as well as State action, so it informs the wider inquiry without creating a detention safeguard. For example, a person accused of an ordinary assault should ordinarily face investigation and trial, while a credible and imminent threat to public order may raise a distinct preventive question. This is a continuing study. It makes no claim about how well the safeguards work in practice, because it uses no national administrative data on detention orders, representation delays, release outcomes or remedies.
Keywords: preventive detention; Article 22; Article 23; personal liberty; representation; habeas corpus; forced labour; constitutional safeguards.
