Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
No sources mandate intimation of grounds of arrest specifically to accused with LON prior to arrest; requirement applies upon actual arrest (Article 22(1)/BNSS Ch.V), irrespective of LON. LON is preventive (immigration alert), not arrest equivalent; 41A CrPC notice may precede threats but separate from LON. Absent arrest, no vitiation grounds; post-arrest compliance (e.g., phone/writing) suffices per Pankaj Bansal. ["MAJEED vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"] ["MUHAMMED SAHALM vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"] ["VAKADA LAKSHMI LAVANYA vs THE UNION OF INDIA - Andhra Pradesh"] ["Kona Shravanthi W/o Kona Syamala Rao vs Union of India, Rep. by its Under Secretary, New Delhi - Andhra Pradesh"] ["Kattamuri Sandeep vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"]
In the realm of criminal law in India, Look Out Notices (LOCs) are powerful tools used by law enforcement to track individuals evading arrest, particularly those with pending non-bailable warrants (NBWs). But a common question arises: whether grounds of arrest should be intimated to the accused against whom a look out notice was issued? This issue touches on fundamental rights under Article 22 of the Constitution and provisions like Section 50 of the CrPC (now mirrored in BNSS). Generally, the answer is no—LOCs do not trigger the requirement to communicate grounds of arrest, as they are pre-arrest administrative measures. This blog post breaks it down with judicial insights, statutory analysis, and practical implications.
Note: This is general information based on legal precedents and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
Look-out notices are issued by police or immigration authorities to alert ports of entry/exit about absconding accused. They aim to prevent flight and facilitate NBW execution under Sections 75 and 77 CrPC, without constituting an actual arrest. As one court observed, IT is to be noticed that under Section 75 of the Code of Criminal procedure, the police executing the warrant of arrest shall notify the substance thereof to the person under arrest and under Section 77 the warrant may be executed anywhere and at any place in India... These notices thus are patently intended to find out the whereabouts of the petitioners with the help of the public... Azhar Alam VS Commissioner of Police Hyderabad - 1992 0 Supreme(AP) 4
LOCs seek public assistance in tracing evaders, as seen in cases where accused abscond with family to unknown places, prompting extensive searches and family intimation about warrants ABHISHEK GUPTA VS UNION OF INDIA - 2022 Supreme(Del) 623. They do not curtail liberty independently but aid court-mandated appearance.
Article 22(1) states: No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest... This safeguard activates only upon actual arrest, not during investigative tracing via LOCs. Courts emphasize: communication of the grounds of arrest, as mandated by Article 22(1) of the Constitution... is meant to serve this higher purpose and must be given due importance. Arvind Kejriwal VS Directorate Of Enforcement - 2024 5 Supreme 359
Similarly, The requirement of informing a person arrested of grounds of arrest is a mandatory requirement of Article 22(1); ... The information of the grounds of arrest must be provided to the arrested person in such a manner that sufficient knowledge of the basic facts constituting the grounds is imparted... Kasireddy Upender Reddy VS State of Andhra Pradesh - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 905
Pre-arrest measures like LOCs or Section 41A CrPC notices (directing appearance without arrest) do not invoke these rights. The police officer shall, in all cases where the arrest of a person is not required under the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 41, issue a notice directing the person... Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar VS Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice - 2018 7 Supreme 718
Courts consistently hold LOCs non-violative of Article 21 (right to life/liberty). Therefore, the issue of lookout notices cannot be said to be in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the same are immune from being challenged in the light of article 21. Azhar Alam VS Commissioner of Police Hyderabad - 1992 0 Supreme(AP) 4
In evasion cases, police may intimate family about warrants without detailing grounds, focusing on apprehension ABHISHEK GUPTA VS UNION OF INDIA - 2022 Supreme(Del) 623. Post-arrest, however, intimation becomes mandatory, often in writing, with records like case diary entries. One case noted post-arrest intimation to relatives and detailed reasons provided to the accused PANKAJ KUMAR vs THE UNION OF INDIA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 11508. Failure post-arrest vitiates proceedings, distinguishing it from LOC stage.
Judicial review of LOCs verifies NBW pendency without mandating pre-disclosure, preserving investigations. In quashing attempts, courts require evidence of evasion before issuing warrants Nazimuddin Fakruddin Kazi VS State of Gujarat - 2015 Supreme(Guj) 992.
While LOCs themselves require no grounds intimation:
In bail contexts, cooperation post-notice weighs in, but evasion justifies LOCs Amit Aggarwal VS State NCT of Delhi - 2020 Supreme(Del) 172.
Courts dismiss overbroad challenges, as in cases distinguishing valid notice service via UPC or family intimation PRIME INDUSTRIES VS RAFEEQ AHMED - 1997 Supreme(Del) 337.
Look Out Notices are essential for tracing evaders but do not require intimating grounds of arrest, as no arrest occurs. Rights under Article 22(1) and CrPC Section 50 trigger only post-arrest. This balance protects public safety while safeguarding liberties.
Key Takeaways:- LOCs ≠ Arrest; no pre-intimation needed Azhar Alam VS Commissioner of Police Hyderabad - 1992 0 Supreme(AP) 4.- Post-arrest compliance is mandatory or arrest fails Kasireddy Upender Reddy VS State of Andhra Pradesh - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 905.- Distinguish tracing aids from custody obligations.- Always verify NBW pendency in challenges.
Stay informed on evolving jurisprudence—recent cases reinforce these lines, emphasizing timely post-arrest action PANKAJ KUMAR vs THE UNION OF INDIA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 11508. For personalized guidance, reach out to legal experts.
He further submits that the police issued notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., and even before giving reply to the said notice, police are threatening to arrest the petitioner. ... Having regard to the facts and circumstances and looking into the nature of allegations leveled against the petitioner and since nolice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., has already been issued him, without adverting to the merits of the matter, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail ... He further submits that the de-facto complainant used to quar....
It is true that the grounds of arrest were not intimated to the relatives of the applicant in writing. But, the case diary would show that it was intimated to the relatives over phone. ... The question whether failure to communicate written grounds of arrest would render the arrest illegal, necessitating the release of the accused, is no longer res integra. The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others [ BNSS have been complied with. ... It was furt....
Nolice sent under UPC to appellant No. 1 was at correct address of the firm, therefore, the Courts below drew the conclusion that nolice sent under UPC had been served on the tenant. ... In the written statement Filed in that civil suit these appellants No. 2 and 3 never look the plea that they were the tenants and not the Firm. ... and (ii) whether notice of demand was validly served and if not, could a decree of eviction be passed? ... The appellants look the plea that rent w. e. f. 1st March,1980 upt....
The accused-applicant was also intimated that detailed reasons of arrest have been explained to him, in writing. ... The learned counsel submits that on 23.06.2025, after the arrest of the accused-applicant, his wife was supposedly intimated by the NCB officials over the phone without giving sufficient details of the grounds of arrest of the accused- applicant. ... The learned counsel submits that in the instant case, as the wife of the acc....
The question whether failure to communicate written grounds of arrest would render the arrest illegal, necessitating the release of the accused, is no longer res integra. The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others BNSS have been complied with. ... The notice served on the applicant under Section 47 of shows that at the time of his arrest, the specific grounds and reasons for arrest were communicated to him. The grounds of arrest have been #HL....
The case of the applicant is that the written grounds of arrest were not intimated to his relative and hence the arrest stands vitiated and he is entitled to be released on bail. I went through the case diary. ... In this case, the arrest was before the date of the said judgment and the grounds of arrest were intimated to the applicant in writing and to his relative over phone. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. ... It shows that the grounds of a....
Thiba Phom, the learned Public Prosecutor, Nagaland that the reasons of arrest were duly intimated to the accused persons in writing which was to the effect to prevent the accused persons from committing any further crime. ... on the basis of which the petitioner was intimated about the grounds of arrest. ... It also mentions that intimation has to be given to the relatives of the accused persons about the grounds of their arrest. The entries made in....
The question whether failure to communicate written grounds of arrest would render the arrest illegal, necessitating the release of the accused, is no longer res integra. The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others Mihir Rajesh Shah (supra), the arrest is vitiated. ... It was also observed in the said judgment that although there is no requirement to communicate the grounds of arrest in writing, there is no harm if the grounds of arrest are commu....
The question whether failure to communicate written grounds of arrest would render the arrest illegal, necessitating the release of the accused, is no longer res integra. The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others BNSS have been complied with. ... It would further show that the grounds of arrest and the reasons for the arrest were communicated to the relative of the applicant over the phone. In the notice prepared under Section 48 of the , it is specifically stat....
The case of the applicant is that the written grounds of arrest were not intimated to his relative and hence the arrest stands vitiated and he is entitled to be released on bail. I went through the case diary. ... In this case, the arrest was before the date of the said judgment and the grounds of arrest were intimated to the applicant in writing and to his relative over phone. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. ... It shows that the grounds of a....
No clue could be found of the petitioner and his father was intimated of the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner. The constituted teams made extensive searches to arrest the petitioner but were of no avail. It was secretly revealed that the petitioner had absconded with his family and wife to an unfamiliar place.
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) in Bail Appl. No.2195/2017, in Bhushan Lal Khanna vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) in Bail Appl. Reliance was placed on behalf of the applicant on the verdict of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre VS. State of Maharashtra and Ors. AIR 2011 SC 312 and the parameters laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court therein vide para 122 thereof were also relied upon, which read to the effect: “122. No.2529/2017 to contend to the effect that where the accused has joined the investigation and fully cooperated with the Investigating Agency and....
The seized blood stained material objects have been sent to RFSL, Karimnagar and reports were received. P.W.21 examined and recorded the statement of P.W.9. Later, P.W.21 brought the aforementioned accused to the Police Station at 15.30 hours, issued arrest memos affecting their arrest and intimated their relatives. The seized property was deposited in the Court on 12.03.2008.
It may also be noted that the same issue has been considered in a judgment reported by the Patna High Court in the judgment reported in 2009 Law Suit (Pat.) 464 in the case of Randhir Sharma alias Rupesh v. State of Bihar, and the Hon'ble Patna High Court framed the following points for determination: "(i) Whether pending investigation warrant of arrest can be issued against the person who is an accused of non-bailable offence and is evading arrest? Whether in the facts of the instant case, it can be said that the requisition filed by the police and the order passed by lear....
against you as submitted by you, has been issued in 1988 wherein you did not mention the specific details of case No. etc. in your application of issue of warrant etc. Since earlier in 1985 State Government have already intimated that no arrest warrant etc. was issued against you. In view of these circumstances NARC cannot be accepted.
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
