Ramesh Ranganathan, J.

Personal liberty is of the widest amplitude covering a variety of rights. Its deprivation shall only in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law conformable to the mandate of the Supreme Law, the Constitution, more particularly to Article 21 thereof. (N. Sengodan v. State of Tamil Nadu (2013) 8 SCC 664); Bhut Nath Mete vs. State of W.B., (1974) 1 SCC 645)., of all fundamental rights, conceded to the citizens under the Constitution, the right of personal liberty is the most cherished. A person is not to be deprived of this right except in accordance with the procedure laid down by law even if he be a man of the most desparate character. (Pilli Yeteswari v. Govt. of A.P (1996 (4) ALT 485 = (1997)1 ALT (Cri) 184).

Preventive detention is a serious invasion of personal liberty and such meagre safeguards as the Constitution has provided, against the improper exercise of the power, must be jealously watched and enforced by the Court. (Ram Krishan Bhardwaj v. State of Delhi (AIR 1953 SC 318 = 1953 SCR 708). Article 22(3)(b) of the Constitution of India, which permits preventive detention, is an exception to Article 21 of the Constitution. An exception