Key Points: - The court analyzes the constitutional and statutory requirement to communicate grounds of arrest under Article 21 and 22 and BNSS 2023, including timeframes and exceptions (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - Written grounds of arrest are mandatory and must be communicated in a language understood by the arrestee; if not possible at/ar shortly after arrest, they must be provided within a reasonable time and at least two hours before remand before the magistrate, with a note if delayed (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - Non-compliance can render the arrest and remand illegal and entitle the arrestee to bail, and future remand/orders must address the lapse, with expeditious consideration by the magistrate (!) (!) (!) . - In exceptional circumstances where grounds can be supplied later (e.g., documentary evidence or urgent cases), oral grounds at arrest followed by written grounds within two hours prior to remand are permissible; otherwise, non-compliance constitutes grounds for release (!) (!) (!) . - The case holder set bail in the present matter due to non-compliance with writing grounds of arrest, directing personal bond and sureties, and imposing monitoring conditions; emphasizes strict adherence to Mihir Rajesh Shah and Prabir Purkayastha standards, especially in national security context (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .

How to determine when grounds of arrest must be communicated to the arrestee under BNSS 2023?

What is the impact of non-supply or delayed supply of grounds of arrest on the legality of arrest and remand?

What is the court’s ruling regarding bail where grounds of arrest were not properly furnished, in a case involving national security threats?