S.A. SIDDIQ ALIAS SIDDIQI ALIAS MUNICIPALITY SIDDIQ vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 10586

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S VISHWAJITH SHETT, J
S.A. SIDDIQ ALIAS SIDDIQI ALIAS MUNICIPALITY SIDDIQ – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI KARIAPPA N.A
For the Respondents: SMT. RASHMI PATEL

Table of Content
1. the petitioner seeks bail after being arrested without grounds of arrest being served. (Para 1 , 3 , 4)
2. counsel argues that grounds of arrest were not served; this is not disputed. (Para 5 , 6)
3. supreme court mandates informing grounds of arrest as a constitutional right. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. court grants bail due to violation of the requirement to inform grounds of arrest. (Para 11)

ORAL ORDER

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

4. The bail application filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.5060/2025 was dismissed on 22.03.2025. Therefore, he is before this Court.

6. Per contra, learned HCGP who has opposed the petition however does not dispute that grounds of arrest has not been served on the petitioner in the present case.

8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal vs Union of India - (2024)7 SCC 576 andPRABIR PURKAYASTHA VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) (2024)8 SCC 254, has held that service of grounds of arrest on the accused who is arrested is mandatory and failure to comply the said requirement would entitle the accused for bail.

10. In paragraph No.14 of the order passed in the case of Vihaan

Click Here to Read the rest of this document