Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SUNDER MOHAN
Yasar Arafath @ Mannadi Yaser – Appellant
Versus
State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, M-1, Madhavaram Police Station – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of the case and arrest details. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding the legality of the arrest. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observations on communication of grounds of arrest. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. ratio decidendi on the constitutional requirements for arrest. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. conclusion that the case is allowed due to illegal arrest. (Para 10) |
ORDER :
Sunder Mohan, J.
The above Criminal Revision Case has been filed challenging the order of remand dated 23.08.2025 passed as against the petitioner by the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram, in Crime No.564 of 2025.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that on 22.08.2025 at about 9.30 hours, when the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to the respondent police was in duty, he received a secret information about the illegal transport of Ganja; that based on the said information, the Sub-Inspector of Police along with the police team went to the scene of the occurrence near a ground at Madhavaram; that the team intercepted the vehicle bearing Regn.No.TN03 AE 4890 and when the persons in the vehicle were enquired and a search was conducted, A1 was found in possession of 11.60 gms of MMDA Estacy Pills [23 N
The communication of grounds for arrest must be in writing to satisfy constitutional requirements, and failure to do so renders the arrest illegal.
The requirement to communicate grounds of arrest under Article 22(1) is satisfied when essential allegations are conveyed effectively, ensuring the accused's understanding and ability to prepare a de....
Communication of grounds of arrest must be meaningful, ensuring awareness of factual basis for effective legal representation; strict adherence to formalism is not required if substance is achieved.
Supreme Court mandate for written grounds of arrest in all cases is prospective; prior arrests not vitiated by non-compliance.
The requirement to inform an arrestee of the grounds for arrest is a mandatory constitutional and statutory obligation, and failure to do so can render the arrest illegal.
The requirement to communicate grounds of arrest is mandatory and non-compliance may vitiate the legality of the arrest.
The requirement to inform an arrested person of the grounds for their arrest, as mandated by Article 22(1) of the Constitution, is a mandatory condition that must be adhered to, failing which the arr....
The failure to communicate grounds of arrest violates constitutional rights, impacting the legality of custody.
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
