Article 21-A

RIGHT TO EDUCATION
 The State shall provide free and compulsory
education to all children of the age of six to
fourteen years in such manner as the State may,
by law determine.

 21A was added by the Constitution (86th

Amendment) Act, 2002.

 51 A imposes a fundamental duty on

parent/guardian to provide opportunities for
education of his child or as the case may be, ward
between the age of six and fourteen years.
 Article 22
PROTECTION AGAINST
ARREST AND DETENTION
Protection against arrest and
detention in certain cases
 (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:
(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)
 Art 22 embodies the procedural safeguards
against arrest or detention which are available in
the following two cases-

 A. Where the arrest or detention is made under

the ordinary law relating to commission of
offences

 B where the detention is made under a law

providing for preventive detention.
 Object behind Art 22-
 To avoid any miscarriage of justice. It is to correct or
check the use of power by the executive in arresting
or detaining a person.
 Who can claim art 22
 Every person Citizen or a non-citizen
 But not to alien enemy
 Arrest made on the allegation or accusation of an
actual, suspected or apprehended commission by a
person of any offence.
 Arrest and detention means arrest and detention
upon an accusation for a criminal or quasi criminal
offence not to any detentions made in civil matters
i.e., arrests made for the recovery of arrears of land
revenue
 Right to be informed of the grounds of arrest-22(1)
 Right to consult and to be defended by a legal
practitioner- 22(1)
 Right to be produced before the Nearest Magistrate-
22 (2)
 Right not to be detained in custody beyond 24 hours
without the authority of the magistrate -22 (2)
 Exceptions 22(3)
 Any person who for the time being is an alien enemy
 Any person who is arrested or detained under any law
providing for prevention detention
 22(1) right to be informed as soon as may be, of
grounds for arrest or detention
 Imperative requirement
 As soon as may be mean as early as is reasonable in
the circumstances of the particular case.
Case –Joginder kumar v. State of UP AIR 1994
SC1349- the SC has ruled that the right of arrested
person to have some one informed about his arrest
and to consult privately with his lawyer were inherent
in Art 21 and 22
 22(2) person arrested shall not be denied the right
to consult and to be defended by a legal
practitioner of his choice.
 Case- Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary,
Bihar AIR 1979 SC 1377- State is under a
constitutional duty to provide any accused person
who is unable to engage lawyer- free legal services
 22(2)- Right to be produced before the nearest
Magistrate
 Guaranteed with a view to avoid any miscarriage
of justice. It is with the object to correct and
approve the executive action of arresting a person
 Case- CBI v. Anupam J Kulkarni AIR 1992 SC
1768- It was held that the magistrate must apply
his judicial mind to determine whether the arrest
is regular or legal and in accordance with the law.
The magistrate, therefore, while authorising the
extension of arrest must not act mechanically.
 Nearest Magistrate- it means Magistrate found
to be nearest to place of arrest.
 It is immaterial whether the magistrate has or
does not have jurisdiction to try the case or that
the magistrate sits in a court or not, at the time
the arrested person is produced before him.

 Preventive Detention- it means the detention of

a person without trial in such circumstances that
the evidence in possession of the authority is not
sufficient to make a legal charge or to secure the
conviction of the detenue by legal proof, but may
still be sufficient to justify his detention.
 The object of prevention detention is not to
punish, but to intercept, to prevent the detenue
from doing something prejudicial to the State or
to prevent an individual from achieving the
particular object.
 The justification for preventive detention is
suspicion or reasonable apprehension reasonable
probability, of the impending commission of an
act pre judicial to the State.
 The object is to prevent the abuse of freedom by
anti-social and subversive elements.
 (b) The second part of Article 22 grants protection to
persons who are arrested or detained under a preventive
detention law. This protection is available to both
citizens as well as aliens and includes the following:

(i) The detention of a person cannot exceed three
months unless an advisory board reports sufficient cause
for extended detention. The board is to consist of judges
of a high court. [ 22 (4) ]

(ii) The grounds of detention should be communicated to

the detenu. However, the facts considered to be against
the public interest need not be disclosed. [22 (5) a]

(iii) The detenu should be afforded an opportunity to

make a representation against the detention order. [22
(5) b]

 Iv) No right to Disclosure of Certain Facts [Art 22 (6)]

 Article 22 (7) also authorises the Parliament to prescribe

 (a) the circumstances and the classes of cases in which a person

can be detained for more than three months under a preventive
detention law without obtaining the opinion of an advisory
board;

(b) the maximum period for which a person can be detained in
any classes of cases under a preventive detention law; and

(c) the procedure to be followed by an advisory board in an

inquiry.

The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 has reduced the period of

detention without obtaining the opinion of an advisory board
from three to two months. However, this provision has not yet
been brought into force, hence, the original period of three
months still continues.
 The Constitution has divided the legislative power
with regard to preventive detention between the
Parliament and the state legislatures. The
Parliament has exclusive authority to make a law
of preventive detention for reasons connected
with defence foreign affairs and the security of
India. Both the Parliament as well as the state
legislatures can concurrently make a law of
preventive detention for reasons connected with
the security of a state, the maintenance of public
order and the maintenance of supplies and
services essential to the community.

 The preventive detention laws made by the Parliament are:
(a) Preventive Detention Act, 1950. Expired in 1969
 .
(b) Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA), 1971. Repealed in 1978.

(c) Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling
Activities Act (COFEPOSA), 1974.

(d) National Security Act (NASA), 1980.

(e) Prevention of Black marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of
Essential Commodities Act (PBMSECA), 1980.

(f ) Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), 1985.
Repealed in 1995.
 (g) Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act (PITNDPSA), 1988. (10 Prevention of Terrorism Act
(POTA), 2002.
Repealed in 2004. It is unfortunate to know that no democratic country
in the world has made preventive detention as an integral part of the
Constitution as has been done in India.