Explanation:

both (a) and (b) are correct

• Article 22 must be confined to cases of arrest of persons who are suspected to have committed an act of criminal or quasi-criminal nature or to some activity prejudicial to the public or the State interest, and not to every kind of arrest including arrest for non-payment of (public dues.

It is further contended that the legislation on which- reliance is placed for supporting the arrest is also inconsistent with Article 22 of the Constitution in particular Clauses (1) and (2). It is not that Section 46(2), Income-tax Act could as a whole be considered to be affected by the said Article but it is only Section 48, Revenue Recovery Act, that is urged as contravening the provisions of Article 22, Clauses (1) and (2).

Article 22, Clause (1) provides that: "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." And by Clause (2) it is provided that:

• "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 ......... and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a Magistrate."

Hence option 3rd is correct.