The failure to communicate arrest grounds to relatives renders the arrest illegal, hence entitling the accused to bail.

ORDER

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.2 in Crime No.28/2025 of Mananthavady Police Station, Wayanad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 22(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 19.03.2025 at about 7:00 am, the applicant along with accused No.1 was found in possession and transporting 6.987 gms of MDMA in a vehicle bearing registration No. KL/01/CY/6215, at Tholpetty Excise check post, Thirunelli Village, Mananthavady Taluk in contravention of the provisions of the NDPS Act and Rules. During the course of investigation, based on the confessional statement of accused No.1, 285 gms of Methamphetamine was recovered from the dickey of the car kept concealed in a secret chamber created for the purpose of concealment of contraband.

4. I have heard Sri. Vishnuprasad Nair, the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. M.K. Pushpalatha, 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 19.03.2025 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, the perusal of the records show that the grounds of arrest have been communicated to the arrestee, but they were not communicated to the near relatives. Annexure 3 is the arrest memo given to the applicant and Annexure 4 is the arrest intimation prepared for giving to the relatives. There is an endorsement in Annexure 4 that the arrest was intimated to a relative, namely Mihad, over phone. Annexure 5 copy of the passport of Muhsir Mihad would show that on the date of arrest, he was abroad. As such, it is evident that grounds of arrest were not communicated to the near relatives. The Supreme Court in Kasireddy Upender Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1228) has held that the grounds of arrest should not only be provided to the arrestee but also to his family members and relatives so that necessary arrangements are made to secure the release of the person arrested at the earliest possible opportunity so as to make the mandate of Art.22(1) meaningful and effective, failing which, such arrest would be rendered illegal. A learned Single Judge of this Court inAlvin Riby v. State of Kerala (2025 KER 67079 ) followingKasireddy Upender Reddy (supra) held that failure to communicate the grounds of arrest to the near relatives renders the arrest illegal. Inasmuch as the grounds of arrest were not communicated to the relatives of the applicant, the arrest stands vitiated and he is entitled to be released on bail.

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

(i) The applicant shall be relea