Article 22 of the Constitution of India does not provide for which one

Article 22 of the Constitution of India does not provide for which one of the following?

The detention of a person detained under any preventive detention law has to be considered by an Advisory Board headed by a sitting judge of the High Court.
An arrested person has a right of legal representation.
An arrested person has right to know the grounds of his/her arrest.
A person cannot be detained in custody beyond twenty-four hours (excluding journey time) without the authority of a Magistrate.
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2019-20
The correct option is A) The detention of a person detained under any preventive detention law has to be considered by an Advisory Board headed by a sitting judge of the High Court.
Article 22 of the Constitution deals with protection against arrest and detention. Article 22(1) grants the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest and the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner (covering options B and C). Article 22(2) mandates production before a Magistrate within 24 hours (excluding journey time) (covering option D). Article 22(4) deals with preventive detention and states that detention beyond three months must be reviewed by an Advisory Board consisting of persons who are, or have been, or are qualified to be appointed as Judges of a High Court. It does *not* require that the Advisory Board must be *headed by a sitting judge* of the High Court. It can be headed by a retired judge or a person qualified to be a judge.
Article 22 provides a balance between individual liberty and state power, particularly in the context of preventive detention laws. While it grants rights to arrested persons (Art 22(1), (2)), it also lays down safeguards and procedures for preventive detention (Art 22(4)-(7)), such as the need for an Advisory Board review for detention beyond three months, consultation with lawyers, etc. The specific composition and chairmanship of the Advisory Board are detailed, but the requirement for a *sitting* judge as head is not mandated by the article.