1) Prabir Purkayastha Case: Legal mandate for disclosing arrest grounds to PMLA/UAPA accused strengthened
We are of the firm opinion that once this Court has interpreted the provisions of the statute in context to the constitutional scheme and has laid down that the grounds of arrest have to be conveyed to the Accused in writing expeditiously, the said ratio becomes the law of the land binding on all the Courts in the country by virtue of Article 141 of the Constitution of India. {Para 46}
49. It may be reiterated at the cost of repetition that there is a significant difference in the phrase 'reasons for arrest' and 'grounds of arrest'. The 'reasons for arrest' as indicated in the arrest memo are purely formal parameters, viz., to prevent the Accused person from committing any further offence; for proper investigation of the offence; to prevent the Accused person from causing the evidence of the offence to disappear or tempering with such evidence in any manner; to prevent the arrested person for making inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Investigating Officer. These reasons would commonly apply to any person arrested on charge of a crime whereas the 'grounds of arrest' would be required to contain all such details in hand of the Investigating Officer which necessitated the arrest of the Accused. Simultaneously, the grounds of arrest informed in writing must convey to the arrested Accused all basic facts on which he was being arrested so as to provide him an opportunity of defending himself against custodial remand and to seek bail. Thus, the 'grounds of arrest' would invariably be personal to the Accused and cannot be equated with the 'reasons of arrest' which are general in nature.
51. As a result, the Appellant is entitled to a direction for release from custody by applying the ratio of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal(supra).
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 2577 of 2024.
Decided On: 15.05.2024
Prabir Purkayastha Vs. State (NCT of DELHI)
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.
Citation: MANU/SC/0435/2024.
https://www.lawweb.in/2024/11/prabir-purkayastha-case-legal-mandate.html
2) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.17029 OF 2024
Sachin Mahipati Nimbalkar Vs The State of Maharashtra
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED : 23rd OCTOBER, 2024
Reiterates same ratio Prabir Purkayastha
3) Supreme Court: Under which circumstances burden of proof would be on investigating officer that he has supplied grounds of arrest to accused?
As far as the first contention is concerned, the person who is arrested can discharge his burden by simply alleging that grounds of arrest were not informed to him. If such an allegation is made in the pleadings, the entire burden is on the arresting agency or the State to satisfy the court that effective compliance was made with the requirement of Article 22(1). Therefore, the view taken by the High Court is completely erroneous. {Para 31}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 621 of 2025.
Decided On: 07.02.2025
Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and N. Kotiswar Singh, JJ.
Authored By : Abhay Shreeniwas Oka, N. Kotiswar Singh
Abhay Shreeniwas Oka, J.
Citation: 2025 INSC 162, MANU/SC/0161/2025.
https://www.lawweb.in/2025/03/supreme-court-under-which-circumstances.html
4) Supreme Court: If Arrest Is Made On Warrant, No Separate Grounds Of Arrest Need To Be Given.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 2808 of 2025.
Decided On: 23.05.2025
Kasireddy Upender Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ.
Citation: MANU/SC/0773/2025.
https://www.lawweb.in/2025/05/supreme-court-if-arrest-is-made-on.html
5) Whether supplying ground of arrest to father of petitioner who had filed complaint against petitioner and was not nominated person is sufficient compliance of S 48 of BNSS?
No material produced on record indicates that the petitioner had ever nominated or disclosed his father's or his lawyer's name for supplying the grounds of arrest as contemplated under section 48 of the BNSS. Therefore, we find substance in the second ground raised on behalf of the petitioner that the grounds of arrest were not supplied as contemplated under section 48 of the BNSS. {Para 26}
In the High Court of Bombay
Writ Petition No. 2989 of 2025
Hemang Jadavji Shah Vs State of Maharashtra
(Before Gauri Godse and Somasekhar Sundaresan, JJ.)
Decided on May 30, 2025
6) Bombay HC upholds Trial Court’s view that informing grounds of arrest four minutes after arrest was not unreasonable.
In the High Court of Bombay
(Before Neela Gokhale, J.)
Gunwant Tarachand Jain Vs State of Maharashtra,
Criminal Writ Petition No. 393 of 2025
Decided on February 12, 2025,
Citation: 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 273.
https://www.lawweb.in/2025/06/bombay-hc-upholds-trial-courts-view.html
5) Supreme Court: Delay in furnishing written grounds of arrest or alleged procedural lapses does not constitute valid grounds for grant of bail in serious offences unless prejudice is shown
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - S.437, S.439, S.50 - Whether delay in furnishing written grounds of arrest or alleged procedural lapses can constitute valid grounds for grant of bail in serious offences -- Held, constitutional and statutory framework mandates that arrested person must be informed of the grounds of arrest -- But, provisions does not prescribe a specific form or insists upon written communication in every case -- Substantial compliance with these requirements is sufficient, unless demonstrable prejudice is shown -- Procedural lapses in furnishing grounds of arrest, absent prejudice, do not ipso facto render custody illegal or entitle the accused to bail -- Constitution of India, Art.22(1).
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal Nos. 3528-3534 of 2025
Decided On: 14.08.2025
State of Karnataka Vs. Darshan and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ.
Author: R. Mahadevan, J.
Citation: 2025 KHC 6693: 2025 INSC 979, MANU/SC/1098/2025
https://www.lawweb.in/2025/08/supreme-court-delay-in-furnishing.html
6) Supreme Court directions for providing grounds of arrest to accused within reasonable time for all offences under IPC
In conclusion, it is held that:
i) The constitutional mandate of informing the
arrestee the grounds of arrest is mandatory in all
offences under all statutes including offences
under IPC 1860 (now BNS 2023);
ii) The grounds of arrest must be communicated in
writing to the arrestee in the language he/she
understands;
iii) In case(s) where, the arresting officer/person is
unable to communicate the grounds of arrest in
writing on or soon after arrest, it be so done orally.
The said grounds be communicated in writing
within a reasonable time and in any case at least
two hours prior to production of the arrestee for
remand proceedings before the magistrate.
iv) In case of non-compliance of the above, the arrest
and subsequent remand would be rendered illegal
and the person will be at liberty to be set free. {Para 56}
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2195 OF 2025
MIHIR RAJESH SHAH Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Author: AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.
Citation: 2025 INSC 1288.
Dated: NOVEMBER 06, 2025.
https://www.lawweb.in/2025/11/supreme-court-directions-for-providing.html
7) Supreme Court: Giving Arrest Memo Not Same As Supplying Grounds Of Arrest
We are in agreement with the submission made by the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant that the said arrest memo cannot be construed as grounds of arrest, as no other worthwhile particulars have been furnished to him.
This, being a clear non-compliance of the mandate under Section 50 of the Code which has been introduced to give effect to Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, 1950 we are inclined to set aside the impugned judgment, particularly, in light of the judgment rendered by this Court reported as Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) - (2024) 8 SCC 254.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1518 /2025 [@ SLP [CRL.] NO.1662/2025]
ASHISH KAKKAR Vs UT OF CHANDIGARH
Author: M.M. SUNDRESH; J., RAJESH BINDAL; J.
Dated: MARCH 25, 2025.
https://www.lawweb.in/2025/12/supreme-court-giving-arrest-memo-not.html
8) Supreme Court: Under which circumstances can an investigating officer again seek custody of the accused after the accused is released on the grounds of non-furnishing of grounds of arrest?
It goes without saying that if the abovesaid schedule
for supplying the grounds of arrest in writing is not
adhered to, the arrest will be rendered illegal entitling
the release of the arrestee. On such release, an
application for remand or custody, if required, will be
moved along with the reasons and necessity for the
same, after the supply of the grounds of arrest in
writing setting forth the explanation for non-supply
thereof within the above stipulated schedule. On
receipt of such an application, the magistrate shall
decide the same expeditiously and preferably within
a week of submission thereof by adhering to the
principles of natural justice. {Para 55}.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2195 OF 2025
MIHIR RAJESH SHAH Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Author: AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.
Citation: 2025 INSC 1288.
Dated: NOVEMBER 06, 2025.
https://www.lawweb.in/2025/11/supreme-court-under-which-circumstances.html
No comments:
Post a Comment