VoxJuris
Home › Acts › Constitution › Part III › Article 22

Constitution of India · Part III: Fundamental Rights · Right to Freedom

Article 22: Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases

In plain words

A person who is arrested must be told the grounds for arrest as soon as possible, and has the right to consult and be defended by a lawyer of their choice. They must be produced before the nearest magistrate within twenty-four hours (excluding travel time), and cannot be held longer without the magistrate's authority.

  • These protections do not apply to enemy aliens or people held under preventive detention laws.
  • Preventive detention cannot exceed three months unless an Advisory Board of High Court judges (or those qualified to be) finds sufficient cause, or a law of Parliament allows it.
  • A detained person must be told the grounds of detention as soon as possible and given the earliest chance to make a representation against it, though facts against the public interest need not be disclosed.
  • Parliament can set the cases where longer detention is allowed without an Advisory Board, the maximum period, and the Board's procedure.

A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.

Read the in-depth explanation, with key Supreme Court rulings ↓

Official text

(1) No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice.

(2) Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate.

(3) Nothing in clauses (1) and (2) shall apply—

(a) to any person who for the time being is an enemy alien; or

(b) to any person who is arrested or detained under any law providing for preventive detention. (4) No law providing for preventive detention shall authorise the detention of a person for a longer period than three months unless—

(a) an Advisory Board consisting of persons who are, or have been, or are qualified to be appointed as, Judges of a High Court has reported before the expiration of the said period of three months that there is in its opinion sufficient cause for such detention:

Explanation.—In this clause, "appropriate High Court" means,—

Provided that nothing in this sub-clause shall authorise the detention of any person beyond the maximum period prescribed by any law made by Parliament under sub-clause (b) of clause (7); or

(b) such person is detained in accordance with the provisions of any law made by Parliament under sub-clauses (a) and (b) of clause (7).

(5) When any person is detained in pursuance of an order made under any law providing for preventive detention, the authority making the order shall, as soon as may be, communicate to such person the grounds on which the order has been made and shall afford him the earliest opportunity of making a representation against the order.

(6) Nothing in clause (5) shall require the authority making any such order as is referred to in that clause to disclose facts which such authority considers to be against the public interest to disclose.

(7) Parliament may by law prescribe— (a) the circumstances under which, and the class or classes of cases in which, a person may be detained for a period longer than three months under any law providing for preventive detention without obtaining the opinion of an Advisory Board in accordance with the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause (4); (b) the maximum period for which any person may in any class or classes of cases be detained under any law providing for preventive detention; and (c) the procedure to be followed by an Advisory Board in an inquiry under sub-clause (a) of clause (4).

Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the official text of the Constitution of India. As amended up to the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023. Text as on 10 September 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.

Understanding this article

Article 22 protects people who are arrested and detained. Clauses (1) and (2) apply to ordinary arrests: the right to be told the grounds of arrest, to consult a lawyer, and to be produced before a Magistrate within twenty four hours. Clauses (3) to (7) deal with preventive detention, where these protections are replaced by a more limited set.

Rights on arrest

  • To be informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds of arrest.
  • To consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of one's choice.
  • To be produced before the nearest Magistrate within twenty four hours, excluding travel time.
  • Not to be detained beyond that period without a Magistrate's authority.

Grounds of arrest in writing

The Supreme Court has held that the grounds of arrest must be communicated to the arrested person in writing, so that he can effectively seek bail and legal advice. Failure to do so vitiates the arrest and the remand, entitling the person to release.

Arrest is not routine

The existence of a power to arrest does not justify its use in every case. Police must be able to justify an arrest by reasons beyond the bare power. Detailed requirements, such as arrest memos, informing a relative, and medical examination, have been laid down to prevent custodial abuse.

Preventive detention

Preventive detention is detention to prevent a person from acting prejudicially in future, without trial. The detenu must be told the grounds as soon as possible and given the earliest opportunity to represent against the order. Detention beyond three months needs an Advisory Board's opinion. Courts scrutinise these safeguards strictly.

Key Supreme Court rulings

  • Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. 1994 INSC 170

    Laid down requirements to be followed in all arrests to prevent abuse: an arrest must be justified, and the arrested person has rights including information of grounds and consultation with a lawyer.

  • D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal 1996 INSC 1508

    Custodial violence violates Article 21; mandatory requirements were issued for arrests and detention, and compensation under public law is available for custodial violence.

  • Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2024 INSC 414

    The requirement to communicate the grounds of arrest or detention in writing under Articles 22(1) and 22(5) is sacrosanct; non-compliance vitiated the arrest and remand.

  • Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India 2023 INSC 866

    In a PMLA arrest, the remand judge failed in his duty to verify compliance with the arrest provisions and the grounds of arrest; the arrests were set aside.

Common mistakes

  • Treating oral communication of grounds as enough after Prabir Purkayastha.
  • Assuming the twenty four hour rule applies to preventive detention; it does not.
  • Thinking a power to arrest means every arrest is justified.

Read with: Article 21 Constitution, Section 50 CrPC, Section 57 CrPC

Prepared with AI assistance as a study aid. Every ruling listed was checked against the Supreme Court's own judgments on this site, and quoted words appear in those judgments; linked names open the full judgment. Read the judgments themselves before relying on them. Not legal advice.

Supreme Court judgments citing the article 22