Failure to communicate arrest grounds violates constitutional rights, rendering detention unconstitutional.

K.BABU, J.

--------------------------------------

B.A No.10680 of 2025 ---------------------------------------

Dated this the 3^rd day of December, 2025 O R D E R This is an application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023.

2. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.489/2025 of Nilambur Police Station, Malappuram. The offences alleged against the petitioner and the other accused are punishable under Sections 22 (c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1985.

3. The prosecution case is that on 08.5.2025 at about 1.45 p.m., the petitioner along with the other accused were found in possession and transportation of 310.8 grams of Methamphetamine in a scooter bearing Reg.No.TO 325 KL 5867 D.

4. The case of the petitioner is that the grounds and reasons for his arrest were not communicated to him.

5. The petitioner was arrested on 09.05.2025 and he has been in judicial custody since then.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the officer who arrested the petitioner/accused No.1 had not complied with the mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and Section 47 of the BNSS in the sense that the grounds of arrest were not communicated.

8. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there is substantial compliance of the requirement regarding the communication of the grounds of arrest. The learned Public Prosecutor produced a copy of the arrest intimation, along with the grounds and reasons for the arrest communicated to the petitioner.

9. The fundamental object sought to be subserved by Article 22 (1) are the following:

(a) To apprise the arrested person of why he/she is being arrested.

(b) To enable the arrestee to frame his defence against possible detention and to seek appropriate legal aid.

10. The mode of communication of grounds of arrest is to be in such a manner that the effectiveness of the same deserves to be tested on the touchstone whether the mode of communication subserves the fundamental object mentioned above.

11. The mode of conveying information of the grounds of arrest must be meaningful so as to serve the objects sought to be achieved. The requirement to communicate the grounds of arrest to an arrested person is sacrosanct and the same must not be breached under any situation. The grounds should be effectively and fully communicated in the language that the arrestee understands. The grounds of arrest are to be effectively communicated not only to the arrestee but also to his friends, relatives or any other nominated person as envisaged under Section 48 of the BNSS . Non-compliance of this constitutional requirement and the statutory mandate would lead to the custody or the detention of the arrestee or detainee being rendered illegal, as it would amount to violation of the fundamental right of the arrestee or detainee. Filing a chargesheet and order of cognizance will not validate the arrest which is per se unconstitutional. The burden is on the police to establish that the grounds of arrest were properly communicated to the arrestee. {Vide : Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India [(2024) 7 SCC 576] , Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2024) 8 SCC 254] , Kasireddy Upender Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh [2025 SCC OnLine SC 1228], Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana [(2025) 5 SCC 799], Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Another [2025 SCC OnLine SC 2356], Shahina v. State of Kerala [2025 (5) KHC 203] and Vishnu N.P. v. State of Keral