Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 18979
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J
SRI. PUNITH. P W/O. PRAKASH – Appellant
Versus
STATE BY BASAVESHWARANAGARA POLICE – Respondent
Writ Petition No.20913 of 2025 (GM-RES)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. GIRI K.
For the Respondents: SRI.B.N. JAGADEESHA
Illegal arrest cannot occur without adhering to legally mandated procedures, specifically concerning notice protocols under BNSS Act.
Headnote:(A) The Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Quashing of FIR and illegal arrest - Petitioner contended that the arrest was made without following due procedure as prescribed by Sections 35(3), (4), (5), and (6) of BNSS Act, 2023 - The Court emphasized the necessity for compliance with statutory procedures prior to arrest. The arrest within short duration of notice violated the rights of the petitioner. (Paras 6, 8)
(B) Criminal Procedure - The importance of following proper notice protocols before arrest to uphold rights, referring to precedents from Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and others. (Paras 7)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought reliefs including the quashing of the FIR and complaint against him in Crime No.266/2025 while alleging illegal arrest.
Findings of Court:
The Court found the arrest illegal due to lack of compliance with statutory requirements.
Issues: Whether the respondent lawfully acted in arresting the petitioner without adhering to statutory processes.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the impugned arrest did not conform to the legal procedures mandated by the BNSS Act, emphasizing on due process.
Result: The petition was partly allowed, the arrest quashed.
Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:
-
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash the FIR and the proceedings against him on the grounds of procedural irregularities and illegal arrest (!) (!) .
-
The police issued a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS Act, 2023, calling the petitioner to appear on the same day without specifying a proper time or allowing sufficient notice, which contravenes statutory requirements (!) (!) .
-
The petitioner was arrested on the same day, shortly after the notice was issued, which the court found to be in violation of the prescribed procedures under Sections 35(3) to (6) of the BNSS Act, 2023 (!) .
-
The court emphasized that proper adherence to statutory notice and arrest procedures is essential to uphold the petitioner’s rights and prevent illegal detention (!) .
-
The court observed that the respondent police's actions, including the immediate arrest following the notice, lacked compliance with the statutory mandates and legal procedures, rendering the arrest illegal (!) .
-
As a result, the court partly allowed the petition, quashing the petitioner’s arrest and directing the authorities to release him immediately (!) (!) .
-
The court also granted liberty to the petitioner to apply for bail or anticipatory bail, which the trial court is instructed to consider within a week of such application (!) .
-
Additionally, the authorities are restrained from taking coercive steps against the petitioner for ten days, provided he cooperates with the ongoing investigation (!) .
-
The order emphasizes the petitioner’s right to approach the court again or pursue other legal remedies if necessary, and directs the registry to communicate the order promptly to relevant authorities for immediate implementation (!) .
-
Overall, the judgment underscores the importance of following statutory procedures in arrest cases to prevent violations of constitutional and legal rights.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks to quash fir and arrest based on procedural irregularities. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. notice under section 35(3) issued but disregarded procedures prior to arrest. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court emphasizes adherence to established procedures in arrest cases. (Para 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 4. petition allowed in part; arrest quashed with directions regarding bail. (Para 9) |
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “(a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash the FIR & Complaint in Crime No.266/2025, filed by the 1st Respondent against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 352 r/w Section 190 of BNS Act and Section 9 of KPID Act (Annexure-A), presently pending before the Prl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
(b) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari declaring that the arrest of the petitioner / accused No.2 in Crime No.266/2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 352 r/w Section 190 of BNS Act and Section 9 of KPID Act by the Basaveshwara Nagar Police is illegal without adhering to the rule of law as held by the Supreme Court reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 any other appropriate writ, order or direction, presently pending before the Prl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
(c) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to immediately release the petitioner / accused No.2 in Crime No.266/2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2) r/w Section 190 of BNS Act and Section 9 of KPID Act filed by the Respondent No.1 (Annexure-A).
(d) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash the entire proceedings on the file of Crime No.266/2025, pending before the Prl. City Civil & Sessions Judge at Bangalore, for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 352 r/w Section 190 of BNS Act and Section 9 of KPID Act, as against the petitioner herein.
(e) Grant such other relief that his Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional SPP for the respondent and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that one Smt. Kusuma M.- complainant filed the instant complaint which is registered as FIR in Crime No.266/2025 dated 08.07.2025 at 9.45 a.m. against petitioner / accused No.2 and other persons for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 352, 190 of BNS, 2023. In pursuance of the same, respondent – Police Authorities issued notice dated 08.07.2025 under Section 35(3) of BNSS to the petitioner.
4. The said notice reads as under:
“¨sÁgÀwÃAiÀÄ £ÁUÀjÃPÀ ¸ÀÄgÀPÁë ¸ÀA»vÉAiÀÄ 35(3)£À ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ ªÉÄÃgÉUÉ £ÉÆÃnøÀÄ F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ vÀªÀÄUÉ w½AiÀÄ¥Àr¸ÀĪÀÅzÉãÉAzÀgÉ, ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ ¦gÁåzÀÄzÁgÀgÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw PÀĸÀĪÀÄ JA. PÉÆÃA ¯Éà ¸ÀĤïï lPÀÄæ, 50ªÀµÀð gÀªÀgÀÄ F ¢£À ¢£ÁAPÀ: 08/07/2025 gÀAzÀÄ oÁuÉUÉ ºÁdgÁV vÀªÀÄä£ÀÄß £ÀA©¹ MlÄÖ 95,00,000/- gÀÆ. ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀqÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ ªÉÆøÀ ªÀiÁr CªÁZÀå ±À§ÝUÀ½AzÀ ¨ÉÊzÀÄ, fêÀ ¨ÉzÀjPÉ ºÁQgÀĪÀ §UÎÉ vÀªÀÄä ºÁUÀÆ ¸Àwñï, ªÀ°äPÁ, zÀ±Àð£ï, ¯ÉÆÃPÉñï, ²æÃzsÀgï ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀĤÃvï gÀªÀgÀÄUÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÝ ¤ÃrgÀĪÀ zÀÆj£À ªÉÄÃgÉUÉ §¸ÀªÉñÀégÀ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Éưøï oÁuÁ ªÉÆ.¸ÀA.266/2025 PÀ®A 316(2), 318(4) ¸À»vÀ 190(2) ©.J£ï.J¸ï jÃvÀå ¥ÀæPÀgÀt zÁR¯ÁVzÀÄÝ, vÀ¤SÉ PÉÊUÉÆArgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
ªÉÄîÌAqÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è ¤ÃªÀÅ J2 DgÉÆæAiÀiÁVzÀÄÝ, ªÉÄîÌAqÀ zÀÆj£À «µÀAiÀÄzÀ°è ¤ªÀÄä£ÀÄß «ZÁgÀuÉUÉ M¼À¥Àr¸À¨ÉÃPÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ, vÁªÀÅ F PÀÆqÀ¯Éà F PɼÀUÉ ¸À» ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ vÀ¤SÁ¢üPÁjAiÀiÁzÀ £À£Àß ªÀÄÄAzÉ ºÁdgÁUÀ®Ä ¸ÀÆa¹zÉ.
F £ÉÆÃnøï£ÉÆA¢UÉ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ ¥Àæ.ªÀ.ªÀgÀ¢ ºÁUÀÆ zÀÆj£À ¥ÀæwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ®UÀwÛ¹zÉ.”
5. As can be seen from the aforesaid notice issued under Section 35(3) of BNSS calls upon the petitioner – accused No.2 to appear before the respondent on the very same day even without specifying the time for his appearance
