Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
ASHISH NAITHANI
Sanjay Kumar @ Fauji – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to impugned order and remand details (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding communication of grounds of arrest (Para 3 , 4 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. opposing views on grounds of arrest communication (Para 15 , 16 , 20) |
| 4. constitutional mandate and interpretation of article 22(1) (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 5. satisfaction of legal requirements concerning grounds of arrest (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 6. final conclusions on the legality of the remand order (Para 34 , 35) |
JUDGMENT :
Ashish Naithani, J.
The present Criminal Revision has been preferred by the Revisionist challenging the legality and propriety of the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate whereby the Revisionist was remanded to judicial custody.
2. The factual background, in brief, is that the Revisionist was arrested in connection with an offence registered under the relevant penal provisions. The arrest was effected without warrant and the Revisionist was produced before the learned Magistrate for remand.
3. At the time of production before the Magistrate, an objection was raised on behalf of the Revisionist that the constitutional mandate under Article 22(1) of the Constitu
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 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 communication of grounds for arrest must be in writing to satisfy constitutional requirements, and failure to do so renders the arrest illegal.
Absence of written grounds of arrest does not mandate bail absent prejudice; substantial compliance via awareness suffices in serious offences, especially pre-'henceforth' rulings.
(1) Arrest – Constitutional Safeguards – A police officer cannot casually arrest a person against whom commission of an offence punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years is alleged – The....
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 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....
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
