Communication of arrest grounds is mandatory; failure renders arrest illegal.

O R D E R

This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.1 in Crime No.19/2024 of Excise Enforcement & Anti Narcotic Special Squad, Kozhikode. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 22 (c), 27A r/w Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on

04.07.2024 at 05.05 hours, the applicant was found in possession of 981.099 grams of methamphetamine near the gate leading to the platform No.1 of Kozhikode Railway Station and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.P.Mohamed Sabah, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.M.C.Ashi, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been in custody since 04.07.2024 and the grounds of arrest were not communicated in accordance with law at the time of his arrest. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor on the other hand opposed the bail application and submitted that the grounds of arrest were duly communicated.

6. Though prima facie there are materials on record to connect the applicant with the crime, since the applicant has raised a question of absence of communication of the grounds of his arrest, let me consider the same.

7. It is now well settled that the requirement of informing a person of the grounds for arrest is a mandatory requirement of Art.22(1) of the Constitution and Section 47 of BNSS and absence of the same would render the arrest illegal (See.Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others [(2024) 7 SCC 576] ,Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2024) 8 SCC 254] ,Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others (2025 SCC OnLine SC 269] and Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Another (2025 SCC OnLine SC 2356).

8. In the instant case, on a perusal of the records of investigation, it is seen that the grounds for arrest have been properly mentioned in the notice given to the arrestee. However, in the arrest intimation given to the near relative, only the provision of law has been mentioned, without reference to the quantity of contraband. The quantity of contraband is necessary to be mentioned since it enables the relatives of the accused to identify whether the accused is involved in a bailable or non-bailable offence. This court had considered similar issues in Vishnu N.P. v. State of Kerala [2025 KHC OnLine 1262] , wherein it was specifically observed that the arrest intimation communicated to the near relative must mention not only the penal section but also the quantity of contraband allegedly seized.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions: -

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The applicant shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on th