Mandatory communication of arrest grounds is essential; non-compliance renders arrest invalid.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH WEDNESDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF MARCH 2026 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1948 BAIL APPL. NO. 1397 OF 2026 CRIME NO.122/2025 OF Anthikad Police Station, Thrissur PETITIONER:

NISHAD, AGED 30 YEARS S/O ABDUL RAZAK , PULIYAPURATH HOUSE, CHETTUPUZHA , THRISSUR, PIN - 680012 BY ADVS. SRI.JITHIN BABU A SHRI.ARUN SAMUEL SHRI.ANOOD JALAL K.J.

SMT.DONA MATHEW RESPONDENT:

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 ADV SRI. NOUSHAD K A SR. PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

25.03.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

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 sole accused in Crime No.122/2025 of Anthikad Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 65(2), 64(2)(f), 64(2)(m) and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 3(a)(b), read with 4(2), 5(l), (m), (n) read with 6(1), 7 read with 8, 11(vi) read with 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012 and Sections 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant, who is the step father of the victim girl aged 6 years, on 19.01.2025 at her house in Manalur Palazhi and on some other days, in her house at Chettuva, subjected the survivor to sexual atrocity as well as showed nude videos to the child in his mobile phone and thereby committed the offences. It is further alleged that the applicant had knowledge that the victim and her mother belonged to a Scheduled Caste.

4. I have heard Sri. Jithin Babu A, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. K.A. Noushad, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the requirement of informing the arrested person of the grounds of arrest is mandatory under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and Section 47 of the BNSS and inasmuch as the applicant was not furnished with the grounds of arrest, his arrest was illegal and is liable to be released on bail. On the other hand, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor submitted that all legal formalities were complied with in accordance with Chapter V of the at the time of the arrest of the applicant. It is further submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant and hence he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

6. The applicant was arrested on 25.1.2025 and since then he is in judicial custody.

7. 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.

8. Chapter V of BNSS , 2023 deals with the arrest of persons. Sub-section (1) of Section 35 of lists cases when police may arrest a person without a warrant. Section 47 of clearly states that every police officer or other person arresting any person without a warrant shall forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest. Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India provides that no person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest. Thus, the requirement of informing the person arrested of the grounds of arrest is not a formality but a ma