Protection against Arrest and Preventive Detention — MCQs

All questions with answers and explanations

Read the full set here, or use the practice card above to test yourself one question at a time.

1. Article 22(1) and 22(2) guarantee a person arrested under ordinary law the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest, to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of choice, and to be produced before the nearest magistrate within:

   • 48 hours
   • 24 hours, excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the magistrate's court (correct answer)
   • 72 hours
   • There is no time limit

   Explanation. Article 22(2) requires production before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours of arrest, excluding travel time, and prohibits detention beyond that period without the magistrate's authority.

2. Article 22(3) creates an important exception, under which the safeguards in Article 22(1)-(2) do NOT apply to:

   • Any person arrested for any offence whatsoever
   • An enemy alien, or a person arrested/detained under any law providing for preventive detention (correct answer)
   • Women arrested for any offence
   • Persons above 60 years of age

   Explanation. Article 22(3) excludes enemy aliens and persons detained under preventive detention laws from the ordinary-arrest safeguards of clauses (1) and (2) — preventive detention instead has its own separate, more limited safeguards under clauses (4) to (7).

3. Under Article 22(4) (as it originally stands and continues to operate, since the 44th Amendment's changes to it were never brought into force), a person cannot be detained under a preventive detention law for longer than __ months without obtaining the opinion of an Advisory Board:

   • Two months
   • Three months (correct answer)
   • Six months
   • One year

   Explanation. As confirmed in A.K. Roy v. Union of India (1982), the 44th Amendment's changes to Article 22(4) — which would reduce this period to two months and change the Board, have never been brought into force, so the original three-month rule continues to govern preventive detention.

4. A.K. Roy v. Union of India (1982), decided by a five-Judge Bench, upheld the validity of which law?

   • The Preventive Detention Act, 1950
   • The National Security Act, 1980 (correct answer)
   • The Defence of India Act
   • The Code of Criminal Procedure

   Explanation. A sitting Member of Parliament, detained under the National Security Act, 1980, challenged it. The Bench upheld the Act. Preventive detention is a distinct mechanism, and weaker safeguards than a criminal trial do not make it invalid.

5. A.K. Roy v. Union of India also held that proceedings before a preventive-detention Advisory Board are:

   • Equivalent to a full criminal trial, giving the detenu an absolute right to legal representation and cross-examination
   • Advisory and administrative in character, so the detenu has no absolute right to legal representation or cross-examination, though the Board must still act fairly (correct answer)
   • Not required at all under the Constitution
   • Open to public attendance like a criminal trial

   Explanation. The Court held Advisory Board proceedings are advisory/administrative, not a criminal trial, so there is no absolute constitutional right to legal representation or cross-examination — but the Board must still give the detenu a genuine, fair opportunity to make a representation.

6. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) laid down detailed guidelines primarily to prevent:

   • Custodial violence, torture, and deaths in police custody, by requiring specific procedural safeguards during arrest and detention (correct answer)
   • Delays in filing civil suits
   • Corruption in public tenders
   • Traffic violations

   Explanation. D.K. Basu laid down binding requirements (recording arrests, informing a friend/relative, medical examination at intervals, maintaining a memo of arrest with time/date, etc.) to check custodial violence and safeguard the arrested person's Article 21/22 rights.

7. Which of these is a real requirement laid down by the D.K. Basu guidelines for police making an arrest?

   • The arresting officer must bear accurate, visible name tags and prepare a memo of arrest, attested by at least one witness, at the time of arrest (correct answer)
   • Arrests can only be made between 9 AM and 5 PM
   • Only senior officers above a certain rank can make any arrest
   • An arrested person must confess before being produced before a magistrate

   Explanation. Among the D.K. Basu requirements: arresting officers must have accurate, visible, clear identification and name tags, and must prepare a memo of arrest at the time of arrest, attested by at least one witness (who may be a family member or a respectable local person).

8. The overall constitutional design of Article 22 reflects a deliberate balance between:

   • An individual's personal liberty and the State's legitimate interest in security/public order, giving strong procedural protection for ordinary arrests while allowing a more limited (but not unchecked) regime for preventive detention (correct answer)
   • Executive power and judicial power, with no reference to individual rights at all
   • Central and State legislative powers
   • Religious freedom and secularism

   Explanation. Article 22 is structured to give robust safeguards (grounds of arrest, legal counsel, 24-hour production) for ordinary arrests, while carving out a separate, deliberately more limited (but still judicially reviewable, per A.K. Roy) framework for preventive detention where the State's security/public-order interest is treated as weightier — this dual structure is the article's defining feature.