Article 22 Rights of Arrested Person: Identifying the Incorrect Statement

Article 22 of the Indian Constitution provides fundamental rights to arrested persons. We need to identify the statement that is NOT correct regarding these rights and related criminal law provisions.

Analysis of Fundamental Rights during Arrest

Let's examine each statement:

• Statement 1: Right to be informed of the offense. This is a constitutionally guaranteed right under Article 22(1) and further clarified by Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). An arrested individual must be informed promptly of the grounds for their arrest. Therefore, this statement is correct.
• Statement 2: Protection for minors and women. Section 437(1) CrPC and general principles of law provide special protections. Women generally cannot be arrested after sunset and before sunrise except in unavoidable circumstances. Similarly, juveniles are afforded specific protections, and their presence solely for questioning at a police station, especially for young boys, is restricted to ensure their well-being. This statement reflects these protective legal principles. Therefore, this statement is considered correct in spirit.
• Statement 3: Production before a Magistrate within 24 hours. Article 22(2) mandates that every person arrested and detained in custody must be produced before the nearest Magistrate within a period of 24 hours of such arrest, excluding the time necessary for the journey. This is also reinforced by Section 57 CrPC. Thus, this statement is correct.
• Statement 4: Confessions in police custody as evidence. Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, states that a confession caused by inducement, threat, or promise is irrelevant in criminal proceedings. Importantly, confessions made by an accused while in police custody are generally considered inadmissible as evidence against them, unless such confession leads to the discovery of a fact (under Section 27, Evidence Act) or is recorded before a Magistrate (under Section 164 CrPC). The statement implies that *all* confessions made in police custody are usable, which is generally NOT the case. Therefore, this statement is incorrect.

Conclusion

Based on the analysis, the statement that is NOT correct regarding the fundamental rights of an arrested person under Article 22 and criminal law is that confessions made in police custody can be used as evidence against the accused.