Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. Nirmal Kumar, J.
A.Renold - Petitioner
Versus
Union, Rep. by The Intelligence Officer - Respondent
Crl.O.P.No.11813 of 2025
Decided On : 17-03-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioner challenges legality of arrest. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. grounds of arrest and article 22 compliance discussed. (Para 3) |
| 3. prosecution presents counterarguments on arrest process. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. court analyzes compliance with legal standards. (Para 9 , 10 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. final decision is to dismiss the petition. (Para 14) |
ORDER :
M. Nirmal Kumar, J.
The petitioner/A3 in R.R.No.44 of 2024 arrested by the respondent viz., Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence on 30.08.2024 and remanded on 31.08.2024 has filed this Criminal Original Petition seeking to set aside the impugned remand order dated 31.08.2024 in R.R.No.44 of 2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Customs Court, Alandur for non- furnishing Grounds of Arrest instead arrest memo only served on the petitioner.
2.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent/Intelligence Officer filed a case in R.R.No.44 of 2024 for offence under Sections 8(C) r/w 21(C), 23(C), 28 & 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (In short “the NDPS Act”) against the petitioner and five others on the basis of secret information. The respondent/Intelligence Officer on 30.08.2024 arrested the petitioner and arrayed him as A3 based on the confession statement of A4. From the petitioner, no seizure of any contraband made. Added to it, the petitioner was not found in conscious or physical possession of any contraband. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner or his wife or his Advocate not provided with a copy of grounds of arrest. A bail application filed before the lower Court got dismissed, another bail application filed before the High Court which was also dismissed. With regard to non furnishing of grounds of arrest, the same not raised in the bail applications since the grounds of arrest not furnished to the petitioner and memo of arrest not furnished to his wife or any family members. Hence, non furnishing grounds of arrest would vitiate the arrest and subsequent remand as per the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana & Anr., reported in MANU/SC/0161 and Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 934
3.He further submitted that as per Section 50 Cr.P.C., (Section 47 of B.N.S.S.), a person arrested to be informed of grounds of arrest and of right to bail. As per Section 50 -A Cr.P.C., (Section 48 of B.N.S.S.), obligation of a person making arrest to inform about arrest to a nominated person by the arrested person. Thus, in this case, the arrest and remand of the petitioner is in violation of Article 22 of Constitution of India . In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the following decisions:
1. Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana & Anr. reported in MANU/SC/0161/2025.
2. Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 934.
3. Kasireddy Upender Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. , reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1228.
4. Ashish Kakkar v. UT of Chandigarh reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC1318.
5. Ahmed Mansoor & Ors., v. The State, Rep. By, Assistant Commissioner of Police & Anr., reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2650.
6. The State of West Bengal v. Anju Begum & Anr., in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No.41187 of 2025 dated 25.08.2025.
7. Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India & Ors., reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1244.
8. Babu M. v. State of Kerala, represented by the Secretary to Government and Another reported in 2025 SCC OnLIne Ker 2155.
9. Naveen Handa v. Central Bureau Narcotics reported in 2025 SCC OnLine Del 5065.
10.Mukul Rai v. State of Karnataka reported in 2025 Supreme (Online)(Lar) 33510.
11.D.Alexis Sudhakar v. The Inspector of Police, E-1, Mamallapuram Police Station, Chengalpet District in Crl.R.C.No.1392 of 2024 dated06.08.2025.
12.Ashok Kumar Sharma v. State of Punjab reported in CRM-M-16156-2025 (O&M), dated 12.05.2025.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner primarily
Compliance with Article 22(1) requires written grounds of arrest conveyed effectively to the arrested individual.
Cheating, criminal breach of trust and criminal conspiracy by public servant – Short delay in informing the person of reason for arrest is permissible.
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 court reaffirmed that informing an arrested person of the grounds for arrest is a constitutional requirement, and non-compliance invalidates the arrest and remand.
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 court reaffirmed the necessity of timely communication of grounds for arrest, highlighting defendant's rights under Article 22 of the Constitution.
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
