The Illegality of Arrest: A Case of Uncommunicated Grounds.
11-August-2025
Writ Petition >> Criminal Law
The Petitioner was a witness in a murder case involving his employer. He was initially interrogated, and his statement was recorded. However, he was later arrested on the charge of destroying evidence by cleaning up the crime scene. The Petitioner's main grievance was that the reasons for his arrest were never communicated to him in writing.

The High Court considered extensive submissions and evidence, including the police's affidavit and case diary. The court found that the "Arrest/Court Surrender Form" had a blank space where the reasons for arrest should have been. Furthermore, the police could not provide any document or acknowledgment proving that the Petitioner was given written grounds for his arrest. Despite the police's claim that a "Panch" (a witness to the arrest proceedings) had attested to the written communication of grounds, the Panch's affidavit and the police's statements were found to be false and contradictory.
Relying on landmark Supreme Court judgments, specifically Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana and Kasireddy Upender Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, the court reiterated that informing an arrestee of the grounds for their arrest in writing is a mandatory constitutional and statutory requirement. The purpose of this is not a mere formality but to enable the arrested person and their family to seek legal recourse and secure release. The court held that a failure to comply with this requirement vitiates the arrest.
Section 482., Code of Criminal Procedure - 1973
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 143., Indian Penal Code - 1860
Section 147., Indian Penal Code - 1860
Section 201., Indian Penal Code - 1860
Section 307., Indian Penal Code - 1860
Section 504., Indian Penal Code - 1860
Section 506., Indian Penal Code - 1860