1. Arrest and remand under the Indian Penal Code — Challenge to arrest and remand order based on procedural non-compliance under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(SC) 1587
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.M. Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal, JJ.
Ashish Kakkar – Appellant
Versus
Ut Of Chandigarh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1518 of 2025 [@ SLP [Criminal] No.1662 of 2025]
Decided on : 25-03-2025
Important Points
The Court held that a mere arrest memo does not constitute the 'grounds of arrest' required under Section 50 of the CrPC and Article 22(1) of the Constitution. Non-compliance with the mandate to furnish specific grounds of arrest renders the arrest and subsequent remand order illegal.
Subject
Criminal Law - Procedural Compliance
Act Referred
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA: Art.22(1)
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE: S.41(a), S.50
INDIAN PENAL CODE: S.384, S.420, S.468, S.471, S.509, S.120(b)
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE: S.41(a), S.50
INDIAN PENAL CODE: S.384, S.420, S.468, S.471, S.509, S.120(b)
Headnote
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 384, 420, 468, 471, 509 and 120B; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 41-A and Section 50 - Non-compliance with procedural mandates - Appellant challenged arrest and remand order on grounds of lack of proper grounds of arrest and non-compliance with mandatory provisions of law, specifically Section 50 that requires grounds to be furnished. The arrest memo provided was insufficient and failed to meet legal requirements of informing the accused. (Paras 3, 6, 7)
(B) Constitutional law - Article 22(1) - Right to be informed of the grounds of arrest - The Court reiterated that the failure to inform the accused constitutes a violation of constitutional rights, meriting the quashing of the arrest and remand. (Paras 7, 8)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was arrested and remanded based on FIR No. 33/2022 without being provided proper grounds for the arrest as mandated by law.
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the appellant's arrest memo lacked sufficient details and did not comply with legal requirements, thus setting aside both the arrest and remand orders.
Issues: The primary issue addressed was the failure to furnish adequate grounds of arrest as per the legal requirements and its implications on the appellant's rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the incomplete information provided to the appellant did not satisfy the requirements of Section 50 of the Code, which is essential for ensuring the rights guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution.
Result: Appeal allowed.
(B) Constitutional law - Article 22(1) - Right to be informed of the grounds of arrest - The Court reiterated that the failure to inform the accused constitutes a violation of constitutional rights, meriting the quashing of the arrest and remand. (Paras 7, 8)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was arrested and remanded based on FIR No. 33/2022 without being provided proper grounds for the arrest as mandated by law.
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the appellant's arrest memo lacked sufficient details and did not comply with legal requirements, thus setting aside both the arrest and remand orders.
Issues: The primary issue addressed was the failure to furnish adequate grounds of arrest as per the legal requirements and its implications on the appellant's rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the incomplete information provided to the appellant did not satisfy the requirements of Section 50 of the Code, which is essential for ensuring the rights guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Non-compliance with Section 41-A CrPC — Lack of hearing during remand — Failure to furnish grounds of arrest under Section 50 CrPC. (Para 3 )
3. Arrest memo in prescribed format providing basic intimation and general reference to co-accused statement does not constitute furnishing of grounds of arrest. (Para 5 , 6 )
4. Non-compliance with the mandate to furnish grounds of arrest under Section 50 CrPC, giving effect to Article 22(1) of the Constitution, vitiates the arrest. (Para 7 )
5. Impugned judgment, arrest, and consequential remand order set aside — Appellant set at liberty. (Para 8 , 9 )
6. Does a standard arrest memo satisfy the requirement of furnishing grounds of arrest under Section 50 CrPC?
No. An arrest memo in the prescribed format used for intimation, containing only the name, place of arrest, and a general statement regarding a co-accused, cannot be construed as the grounds of arrest if no other worthwhile particulars are furnished. (Para 5 , 6 )
7. What is the constitutional significance of Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is introduced to give effect to the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, 1950. (Para 7 )
8. What is the legal consequence of failing to furnish the grounds of arrest to the accused?
Non-compliance with the mandate to furnish grounds of arrest under Section 50 CrPC renders the arrest and any consequential remand orders liable to be set aside. (Para 7 , 8 )
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant was arrested on 30.12.2024 in connection with FIR No. 33/2022 registered under Sections 384 , 420, 468, 471, 509 and 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 and remanded to police custody for a period of 3 days.
3. Vide the present appeal, the appellant has challenged both his arrest and the remand order dated 30.12.2024 on three grounds, namely, there is a clear non-compliance of the mandate under Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'); the appellant was not heard at the time of remand and the grounds of arrest as mandated under Section 50 of the Code have not been furnished to the appellant as against the mere arrest memo.
4. We are inclined to consider only the last issue raised by the appellant with respect to the non-furnishing of the grounds of arrest.
5. Upon perusing annexure P-3, we can see that what has been provided to the appellant is only an arrest memo in the prescribed format, which is meant to be given to the appellant by way of an intimation. It has been filled up with the name of the appellant along with the place of arrest. Additionally, it has been written that he has been arrested based upon the statement of the co-accused.
6. 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.
7. 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 vs. State (NCT of Delhi) - (2024) 8 SCC 254.
8. In such view of the matter, the impugned judgment stands set aside and the arrest of the appellant followed by the consequential remand order are also set aside.
9. The appellant shall be set at liberty, until and unless he is required in any other case. The appeal stands allowed accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
