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.

JUDGMENT :

PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Shiv Nath Tilhari, learned AGA-1 for the State-ATS.

2. This application has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (though it is wrongly transcribed in the memo of petition as BNS), with the prayer that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a suitable Writ, Order, or Direction, including a Writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the judicial remand order dated 22.05.2025 and subsequent remand orders of different dates, passed in connection with Case Crime No. 06/2025, Police Station-ATS, Lucknow. The petitioner further seeks a declaration that his arrest is illegal and ab initio void for being in blatant violation of the mandatory provisions of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and Section 50 of the Cr.P.C. / Section 47 of the BNSS .

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, Mohd. Haroon, was arrested in connection with the aforesaid crime. Learned AGA stated that the petitioner has made an attempt to wage war against the Government of India. The prosecution case is that Mohd. Haroon is an agent of an enemy country who, at the behest of Mujammil Husain (posted in Pakistan High Commission at Delhi), was involved in preparing fake insurance documents to secure visas for individuals, for which he earned a commission. The petitioner had commercial transactions with Dev Raj, Surendra, and Atul Chaudhary, from whom he used to buy scrap material and shared the profits with Mujammil. The petitioner was in communication with Mujammil Hussain and is alleged to have communicated security information to him, which was then sent to Pakistan.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's arrest was made disregarding the pious provisions of the Constitution and that his personal liberty has been curtailed without any valid judicial verdict or remand order. He submits that he was not communicated the grounds of arrest, as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in cases like Prabir Purkayastha and Vihaan Kumar. He argues that the arrest memo is vague and non-specific, which prevented the accused from availing a remedy to protect his fundamental rights, thereby rendering the arrest illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional. He stresses that the communication of grounds of arrest must be in specific and clear terms and is not a mere formality, and oral disclosure does not constitute compliance. He also contends that the arrest was carried out in a mechanical way without the application of mind by the police and that the learned Duty Magistrate also passed the remand order dated 22.05.2025 in a mechanical manner, making the remand sheet and subsequent orders illegal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on the following judgments:

Prabir Purkayastha vs. State of (NCT of Delhi); (2024) 8 SCC 254 , Vihaan Kumar vs. State of Haryana & Another (2025) 5 SCC 799 , Ashish Kakkar v. State (UT of Chandigarh), 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1318 & Anwar Dhebar v. State of U.P. , 2025 SCC OnLine All 3278.

6. The Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner was called for inquiry by the Police Station- ATS, Lucknow. During the inquiry, he stated all the facts. Upon being satisfied that the petitioner had actively participated in activities against the Indian Government, amounting to waging war and endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India, the petitioner was arrested. At the time of arrest, the grounds of arrest were communicated to him. A detailed Fard Memo of Recovery was prepared on the spot, explained to the