Depending on the geology of the terrain and the exploration targets .... Seismic reflection (oil and gas exploration), Magnetic and gravity ( Mineral exploration) and VES ( groundwater surveying in a basement complex where weathered basement could hosts fractures that could trap water)
For principal faults or hidden faults you can use location of seismic events into clusters or lines. The precision of such detecting is proportional to the density of seismic network as 5-10% of the inter-station distance.
For shallow faults you can use VLF method on profiles perpendicular to the supposed faults. The precision of this method is proportional to the step between the measuring points.
The main clue is to know the depth of your target (shallow or deep) and the geological context. In all cases it is necessary to have a contrast (speed, density, permittivity and susceptibility...) and to adapt the method to the size of the target .
If you work in a high velocity or resistivity environment, with a shallow target, GPR and VES or VLF are perfect.
In a deeper context with a bigger targert, seimic (Reflection, Refraction and MASW), gravity and magnetism can give good results.
The size and depth of your target will determine the sampling and others parameters.
of course it depends on your specific requirements (depth of your target, impedance contrast between the geological bodies, etc). High-resolution active seismic profiling is an interesting technique. Look at this paper:
Bruno P.P.G., Improta L., Castiello A., Villani F., Montone P., (2010), The Vallo di Diano Fault System: new evidence for an active range-bounding fault in southern Italy using shallow, high-resolution seismic profiling, Bull. Seismol. Soc. America, v. 100; no. 2; p. 882-890; doi: 10.1785/0120090210.
I propose that some general information presented in our paper "ROCK DESTRUCTION AND METAMORPHIC PROCESSES IN THE EARTH: A LOOK FROM CLASSICAL PHYSICS" by Aleinikov, Belikov, Eppelbaum and Nemzorov (attached) will be also in use.
I will say that resistivity survey (profiling or 2d) is an effective method in the case of shallow depth fractures and faults. Associated with Self Potential method you my get extra information about water movements in this fractures. Also Inducted Polarization my give you an idea of material witch is filling this fractures. Clay my be polarized and will give you IP anomalies.
Your question should be “What is the most appropriate geophysical method for me to use in detecting fractures/fault in the (???) Formation in (Arabia to Xanadu)? The purpose of my study is (???); so my target depth is (???); my budget is (zero to unlimited; my time frame is (tomorrow to next year); and the area of interest is 50 square kilometers.”
All the above answers have merit but nobody has any idea of what your real question is, they are focused on their specialty. Mine is integrated interpretation utilizing all available geological and geophysical data. You should review my paper, Regional Geology and Exploration Potential of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan Utilizing Public Domain Information Including Gravity and Magnetic Data . You can use the Internet to gain access to a tremendous amount of knowledge and data which you can use once you focus on your problem.