Article 22(2) was not violated because the court found that...

Article 22(2) was not violated because the court found that arrest took place after completion of the search and statement recording, and production before the magistrate at 8.30 pm the same day remained within the 24-hour constitutional limit, even after accounting for medical examination time. The challenge to the arrest also failed because the grounds disclosed material from investigation showing involvement in an organised online gaming and shell-entity network alleged to have caused GST evasion under the CGST Act. The court accepted that the record showed prior summons, search action and non-cooperation, and held that the arrest was backed by sufficient material. Relief in writ jurisdiction was therefore declined.