Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
Prabir Purkayastha – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No 2577 of 2024, Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) No. of 2024, D. No. 42896 of 2023
Decided On : 15-05-2024
(A) Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sections 43A, 43B and 43C read with Sections 153A, 120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Section 19 – Constitution of India – Articles 21 and 22 – Arrest – Legality of – Any person arrested for allegation of commission of offences under provisions of UAPA or any other offences has a fundamental and a statutory right to be informed about grounds of arrest in writing and a copy of such written grounds of arrest have to be furnished to arrested person as a matter of course and without exception at the earliest – Purpose of informing to arrested person grounds of arrest is salutary and sacrosanct inasmuch as, this information would be the only effective means for arrested person to consult his Advocate; oppose police custody remand and to seek bail – Any other interpretation would tantamount to diluting sanctity of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 22(1) of Constitution of India – Right to Life and Personal Liberty is the most sacrosanct fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 20, 21 and 22 of Constitution of India – Right to be informed about grounds of arrest flows from Article 22(1) and any infringement of this fundamental right would vitiate process of arrest and remand – Mere fact that charge-sheet has been filed in the matter, would not validate illegality and unconstitutionality committed at the time of arresting accused and grant of initial police custody remand to accused. (Paras 20, 21 and 22)
(B) Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Section 19 – Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sections 43A, 43B, 43C, 13, 16, 17, 18, 22C read with Sections 153A, 120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Constitution of India – Articles 21 and 22 – Arrest – Legality of – Communication of grounds of detention to detenu in writing and in a language which he understands is imperative and essential to provide an opportunity to detenu of making an effective representation against detention and in case, such communication is not made, order of detention would stand vitiated as guarantee under Article 22(5) of Constitution was violated – Grounds on which liberty of a citizen is curtailed, must be communicated in writing so as to enable him to seek remedial measures against deprivation of liberty – Non-compliance of this constitutional requirement and statutory mandate would lead to custody or detention being rendered illegal – In present case, grounds of arrest as conveyed to Advocate are more or less a narration of facts picked up from FIR which in itself does not indicate any particular incident or event which gave rise to alleged offences – However, FIR is not an encyclopaedia and is registered just to set process of criminal justice in motion – There is significant difference in phrase ‘reasons for arrest’ and ‘grounds of arrest’ – ‘Grounds of arrest’ would invariably be personal to accused and cannot be equated with ‘reasons of arrest’ which are general in nature – Copy of remand application in purported exercise of communication of grounds of arrest in writing was not provided to accused appellant or his Counsel before passing of the order of remand dated 4th October, 2023 which vitiates the arrest and subsequent remand of appellant – Appellant is entitled to direction for release from custody – Impugned order passed by High Court declared to be invalid in eyes of law and quashed and set aside. (Paras 25, 26, 27, 30, 41, 49, 50, 51 and 52)
Facts of the case:
Instant appeal by special leave is preferred on behalf of appellant for assailing order dated 13th October, 2023 passed by Single Judge of High Court of Delhi whereby Single Judge dismissed Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 7278 of 2023 filed by appellant seeking directions to declare arrest of Petitioner as illegal and in gross violation of fundamental rights of Petitioner guaranteed under Articles 21 and 22 of Constitution of India.
Findings of Court:
Core issue in this appeal is regarding illegality of process whereby appellant was arrested and remanded to police custody which does not require examining merits of case.
Result : Appeal allowed.
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, the key legal points are as follows:
Fundamental and statutory right to be informed of grounds of arrest: Any person arrested for offences, including those under UAPA or other laws, has the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest in writing and to receive a copy of these grounds at the earliest opportunity. This is essential to enable the arrested individual to consult legal counsel, oppose remand, and seek bail (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Distinction between ‘reasons for arrest’ and ‘grounds of arrest’: There is a clear difference; ‘grounds of arrest’ are personal and specific to the accused, whereas ‘reasons for arrest’ are general. The ‘grounds of arrest’ must be communicated in writing to serve the constitutional and legal purpose of enabling effective legal defense (!) (!) (!) .
Constitutional mandate under Article 22: The rights guaranteed under Articles 21 and 22 include the right to be informed of grounds of arrest in writing and in a language understood by the accused. Non-compliance with this requirement renders the arrest and subsequent detention illegal and unconstitutional (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Implication of non-compliance: Failure to furnish the grounds of arrest in writing before or at the time of remand violates the constitutional guarantee and invalidates the arrest and remand process. Such illegality cannot be validated by subsequent acts like filing a charge sheet (!) (!) (!) .
Application of legal principles across statutes: The statutory provisions requiring the communication of grounds of arrest in both the PMLA and UAPA are pari materia and rooted in the constitutional safeguard under Article 22. Therefore, the interpretation that the grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing applies equally to arrests under UAPA and PMLA (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Effect of procedural irregularities: Arrests made without proper communication of grounds, or in a clandestine manner, violate constitutional rights, and such procedural lapses lead to the arrest and remand being declared invalid and unlawful (!) (!) (!) .
Impact of subsequent legal developments: The interpretation of the constitutional provisions and statutory mandates regarding the communication of grounds of arrest is considered binding as law of the land. Even if the judgment was uploaded after the arrest, the principles laid down are applicable to ensure constitutional protections are upheld (!) .
Final outcome: When the arrest and remand are found to be in violation of these constitutional and statutory requirements, the appropriate remedy is to declare such actions invalid and to order the immediate release of the individual, subject to compliance with bail and bonds if charges are filed (!) (!) .
These points collectively emphasize the paramount importance of safeguarding individual liberty by ensuring the arrest process complies with constitutional mandates, particularly regarding the timely and proper communication of grounds of arrest in writing.
J
1. Leave granted.
2. The instant appeal by special leave is preferred on behalf of the appellant for assailing the order dated 13th October, 2023 passed by learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 7278 of 2023 filed by the appellant seeking the following directions:
“(A) Declare the arrest of the Petitioner as illegal and in gross violation of the fundamental rights of the Petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India in relation to FIR No. 224/2023 dated 17.08.2023 PS Special Cell, Lodhi Road, Delhi Police.
(B) Declare and set aside the Remand Order dated 04.10.2023 passed by the Ld. Special Judge, Patiala House Court as null and void as the same being passed in complete violation of all constitutional mandates including failure to consult and to be defended by legal practitioner of his choice during the Remand Proceedings, being violative of Petitioner's right guaranteed under Article 22 of the Constitution of India.
(C) Direct immediate release of the Petitioner from custody in FIR No. 224/2023 dated 17.08.2023 PS Special Cell, Lodhi Road, Delhi Police.”
Brief Facts:
3. The officers of the PS Special Cell, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi carried out extensive raids at the residential and official premises of the appellant and the company, namely, M/s. PPK Newsclick Studio Pvt. Ltd. (“said company”) of which the appellant is the Director in connection with FIR No. 224 of 2023 dated 17th August, 2023 registered at PS Special Cell, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 22C of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short “UAPA”) read with Section 153A, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter being referred to as the ‘IPC’). During the course of the search and seizure proceedings, numerous documents and digital devices belonging to the appellant, the company and other employees of the company were seized. The appellant was arrested in connection with the said FIR on 3rd October, 2023 vide arrest memo (Annexure P-7) prepared at PS Special Cell, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi.
4. It is relevant to mention here that the said arrest memo is in a computerised format and does not contain any column regarding the ‘grounds of arrest’ of the appellant. This very issue is primarily the bone of contention between the parties to the appeal.
5. The appellant was presented in the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter being referred to as the ‘Remand Judge’) on 4th October, 2023, sometime before 6:00 a.m. which fact is manifested from the remand order (Annexure P-1) placed on record of appeal with I.A. No. 217857 of 2023. The appellant was remanded to seven days police custody vide order dated 4th October, 2023.
6. The proceedings of remand have been seriously criticized as being manipulated by Shri Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel for the appellant and aspersions of subsequent insertions in the remand order have been made. Hence, it would be apposite to reproduce the remand order dated 4th October, 2023 in pictorial form so as to form a part of this judgment.
7. The appellant promptly questioned his arrest and the police custody remand granted by the learned Remand Judge vide order dated 4th October, 2023 by preferring Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 7278 of 2023 in the High Court of Delhi which stands rejected by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi vide judgment dated 13th October, 2023. The said order is subjected to challenge in this appeal by special leave.
Submissions on behalf of the appellant:
8. Shri Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel representing the appellant canvassed the following submissions in order to question the proceedings of arrest and remand of the appellant:
(1) Arrest – Any person arrested for allegation of commission of offences under provisions of UAPA or any other offences has a fundamental and a statutory right to be informed about grounds of arrest....
The requirement to provide written grounds of arrest is mandatory under Article 22(1) of the Constitution, and failure to comply renders the arrest illegal.
The court affirmed that grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing to the accused, ensuring compliance with constitutional rights and enabling effective legal defense.
The court reaffirmed that informing an arrested person of the grounds for arrest is a constitutional requirement, and non-compliance invalidates the arrest and remand.
The arrest of an individual must comply with constitutional and statutory requirements, including providing specific grounds for arrest, which must be communicated in writing to ensure the accused's ....
(1) Arrest – Constitutional Safeguards – A police officer cannot casually arrest a person against whom commission of an offence punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years is alleged – The....
The court ruled that while informing the grounds of arrest is mandatory, recent Supreme Court interpretations regarding PMLA and UAPA do not apply to general offenses under IPC or KCOCA.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
