Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : P. Mohamed Sabah, Libin Stanley, Saipooja, Sadik Ismayil, R. Gayathri, M. Mahin Hamza, Alwin Joseph, Benson Ambrose
For the Respondent: M.C. Ashi

Based on the provided legal document, the key points regarding the issue of communication of grounds of arrest and the entitlement to bail are as follows:

1. The constitutional rights under Articles 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution of India emphasize that an arrestee must be informed of the grounds for arrest as soon as possible, to ensure effective defense and protect personal liberty (!) (!) .

2. The requirement for communication of grounds of arrest is fundamental and cannot be bypassed through mere substantial compliance; the absence of written grounds impairs the constitutional protections unless demonstrable prejudice is shown (!) (!) .

3. The mode of communication must be meaningful, ensuring the arrestee understands the grounds, preferably in writing and in a language they comprehend, to facilitate their right to legal counsel and to challenge the arrest if necessary (!) (!) .

4. Oral explanation alone does not fulfill the legal requirement; written communication is necessary, especially when the grounds are voluminous or sensitive, to provide clarity and record-keeping (!) (!) .

5. The failure to communicate the grounds of arrest in writing, or within a reasonable time (generally within two hours), can render the arrest illegal and violate the arrestee’s rights, leading to the arrest being deemed invalid (!) (!) (!) .

6. The burden of proof regarding compliance with the requirement of informing grounds of arrest lies with the police; if a violation is established, the arrest is considered unconstitutional, and the person must be released (!) (!) .

7. When an arrest is found to violate the constitutional requirement of informing grounds, it results in the arrest being invalid, and continued detention or remand based on such an arrest is also unlawful. The court is obliged to order the release of the accused in such cases (!) (!) .

8. The responsibilities of the magistrate include verifying that the grounds of arrest have been properly communicated before proceeding with remand, and ensuring compliance with constitutional protections (!) (!) .

9. The principles outlined emphasize that the communication of grounds is not just procedural but essential for safeguarding personal liberty, and non-compliance can lead to the arrest being declared illegal, warranting bail even when statutory restrictions exist (!) (!) .

10. In the context of bail, if the court finds that the arrest was made without proper communication of grounds, it must consider the violation of fundamental rights as a significant factor, often resulting in bail being granted (!) (!) .

In summary, proper and timely communication of the grounds of arrest is a constitutional mandate that safeguards personal liberty. Failure to do so invalidates the arrest and necessitates the release of the detainee, regardless of statutory restrictions, to uphold constitutional rights.