Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J, Praveen Kumar Giri, J.
Manjeet Singh @ Inder @ Manjeet Singh Chana – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Prashant Kumar, J.)
1. Heard Shri Anupam Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Paritosh Malviya, learned AGA-I for the State-respondents, and Shri Vinod Singh, learned counsel for the informant – respondent No. 4.
2. The instant writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned remand order dated 26.12.2024 passed by the learned Magistrate in First Information report dated 15.02.2024 registered as Case Crime No.77 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 469, 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Milak, District Rampur, and to direct the release of the petitioner on personal bond as the investigation is still ongoing.
3. Shri Anupam Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the core issue involved in the petition is not the merits of the allegations mentioned in the FIR but the illegality in the process of arrest and procedural lapses during the remand proceedings. He places reliance upon the arrest memo and states that it was a printed proforma which did not contain any column specifying the grounds or reasons for arr
Non-compliance with Article 22(1) and Section 50 Cr.P.C. vitiates arrest and remand, necessitating communication of grounds for arrest and provision of legal aid.
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.
The failure to communicate the grounds of arrest to the accused constitutes a violation of constitutional rights, rendering the arrest and subsequent remand 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....
The failure to communicate the grounds of arrest in writing does not render detention illegal if substantial compliance with constitutional and statutory mandates is demonstrated.
The requirement to inform an arrested person of the grounds for arrest is fundamental; however, substantial compliance may be sufficient, and procedural defects can be curable without rendering deten....
The communication of grounds for arrest must be in writing to satisfy constitutional requirements, and failure to do so renders the arrest illegal.
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.
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
