Back
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Aavesh Ansari @ Chotu – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Applicant is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 181 of 2024, under Section 302 and 120B IPC, Police Station Doiwala, District Dehradun. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. This is second bail application of the applicant. His first bail application was rejected on merits on 14.11.2025.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not been informed the grounds of arrest. Therefore, he is entitled to bail. He would refer to the order of this Court passed on 17.12.2025, in 2nd Bail Application No. 164 of 2025, Yogesh Chand Aggarwal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation . Particularly to paras 34 and 48 (iii) have been referred to.
5. In para 34 of the order, in the case of Yogesh Chand Aggarwal (supra), this Court has observed as to what are the grounds of arrest. The Court observed as follows:-
“34. What are the grounds of arrest? It may be noted that the “grounds of arrest” and the “reasons of arrest” are two separate concepts. It is also settled law that in a cognizable offence, the police may arrest without warrant. But, it is not necessary that in every cognizabl
Detailed arrest memo recording confession of precise acts constituting offence, with offence informed, signed by arrestee and copy served, constitutes valid written communication of grounds of arrest....
The requirement to communicate grounds of arrest is mandatory and non-compliance may vitiate the legality of the arrest.
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) Bail – Filing of charge-sheet and cognizance of order cannot validate an unconstitutional arrest – Constitutional requirement of informing arrestee of grounds of arrest is mandatory.(2) Dictum la....
The right to be informed of the grounds of arrest is fundamental under Article 22(1), and failure to communicate such grounds renders the arrest and subsequent remand illegal.
The constitutional requirement of communicating grounds of arrest is essential, and failure to do so renders the arrest and subsequent remand illegal.
The requirement to inform an arrestee of the grounds for arrest is mandatory and non-compliance can render the arrest illegal.
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.
Mandatory compliance with informing arrested individuals of arrest grounds under Article 22(1) of the Constitution is essential for lawful detention.
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
