The constitutional requirement to inform an arrestee of the grounds for their detention is a mandatory safeguard. While written communication is preferred, substantial compliance—achieved through clear oral or alternate transmission of grounds—fulfills this constitutional obligation, provided the arrestee is fully informed of the allegations against them.

ORDER :

KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J.

This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS), seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.4 in Crime No.510/2025 of Kongad Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Section 22(c), 27A and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, NDPS Act).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 31.05.2025 at about 16.25 hours at Kundalassery, Ettillathupadi, the accused Nos.1 and 2 were found in possession of 1233.90 grams of methamphetamine in a Toyota Qualis car bearing registration No.KL-07-AS-0551, which was parked in front of the courtyard of the house bearing door No.III/128, for the purpose of sale. It is alleged that in the investigation made, it is revealed that the contraband was brought from Bangalore at the instance of accused Nos.3 to 5, who financed for the same by paying it directly to the accused Nos.1 and 2 and sending it to their accounts for unlawful gain and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Sam Isaac Pothiyil, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.K.A.Noushad, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the requirement of informing the arrested person of the grounds of arrest is mandatory under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and Section 47 of the BNSS and inasmuch as the applicant was not furnished with the grounds of arrest, his arrest was illegal and is liable to be released on bail. On the other hand, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor submitted that all legal formalities were complied with in accordance with Chapter V of the at the time of the arrest of the applicant. It is further submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant and hence he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

6. The applicant was arrested on 11.09.2025 and since then he is in judicial custody.

7. Though prima facie there are materials on record to connect the applicant with the crime, since the applicant has raised a question of absence of communication of the grounds of his arrest, let me consider the same.

8. Chapter V of BNSS, 2023 deals with the arrest of persons. Sub-section (1) of Section 35 of lists cases when police may arrest a person without a warrant. Section 47 of clearly states that every police officer or other person arresting any person without a warrant shall forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest. Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India provides that no person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest. Thus, the requirement of informing the person arrested of the grounds of arrest is not a formality but a mandatory statutory and constitutional requirement. Noncompliance with Article 22(1) of the Constitution will be a violation of the fundamental right of the accused guaranteed by the said Article. It will also amount to a violation of the right to personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.

9. The question whether failure to communicate written grounds of arrest would render the arrest illegal, necessitating the release of the accused, is no longer res integra. The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others [(2024) 7 SCC 576], while dealing with Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Lau