Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
Mohammed Saquib, S/o. Mohammed Shahid Pasha – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Represented By Learned State Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR, J.
1. This petition is filed by accused No. 2 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (hereinafter referred to as ` BNS S ’) praying to grant bail in crime No. 63/2025 of Gulpete Police Station, Kolar, registered for offence punishable under Sections 61 , 103, 115(2) read with Section 3 (5) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ` ’).
2. Heard learned Senior counsel for petitioner – accused No. 2 and learned HCGP for respondent – State.
3. Learned Senior counsel for petitioner – accused No. 2 would contend that the grounds of arrest are not furnished to the accused. Only information of arrest has been given to the relatives. Furnishing of grounds of arrest is mandatory in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vihan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and another reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 269 and in the case of Ahmed Mansoor and Ors. Vs. The State, Rep. By, Assistant Commissioner of Police & Anr., Crl.A. No. 4505/2025 dated 14.10.2025. Petitioner – accused No. 2 also had sustained injury and it was stated to be grievous injury and that itself indicates that the deceased was also carry
Procedural lapses in communicating grounds of arrest do not automatically render custody illegal unless they cause demonstrable prejudice, emphasizing compliance with Articles 21 and 22(1) of the Con....
Failure to serve grounds of arrest immediately renders the arrest illegal, entitling the accused to bail, emphasizing the importance of personal liberty and compliance with constitutional rights.
Failure to communicate arrest grounds does not automatically entitle a petitioner to bail involving serious narcotics charges under the NDPS Act.
Absence of written grounds of arrest does not mandate bail absent prejudice; substantial compliance via awareness suffices in serious offences, especially pre-'henceforth' rulings.
The failure to communicate grounds of arrest constitutes a violation of constitutional rights under Articles 21 and 22(1), rendering the arrest illegal and necessitating bail even amidst statutory re....
The failure to inform an arrested person of the grounds for their arrest violates fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution, rendering the arrest illegal and justifying bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
