AI Overview...
-
Pankaj Bansal and Prabir Purkayastha Cases - These landmark Supreme Court decisions emphasize the importance of providing written grounds of arrest to the accused. The courts held that failure to do so violates constitutional rights under Articles 21 and 22, and such procedural lapses can vitiate the arrest process. The judgments clarify that the arrest memo and intimation must be grounds-based and legally justified Badusha vs State of Kerala - Kerala, JOHN MOSES D @ MADAN KUMAR v/s STATE OF KARNATAKA - Karnataka, KVR Vidyasagar VS State Of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh.
-
Legal Principles Established - The rulings in these cases establish that the right to be informed of grounds of arrest is fundamental and non-derogable. They also clarify that reliance on precedents like Pankaj Bansal and Prabir Purkayastha is crucial in cases involving arrest procedures under laws like PMLA and UAPA, especially concerning procedural correctness and constitutional protections John Moses D @ Madan Kumar, S/o John Devamani VS State Of Karnataka - Karnataka, WISDOM SAVANE vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA - Karnataka.
-
Application to Statutes and Serious Offenses - While these cases primarily address procedural violations, their principles are applicable even in grave cases, emphasizing that procedural safeguards are essential regardless of the offense's severity. The courts have reinforced that statutory provisions like Section 50 of Cr.P.C. are rooted in constitutional rights, and procedural violations can impact the legality of arrests Vicky Bharat Kalyani Vs The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. - Bombay.
-
Reiteration and Consistency - The Supreme Court has reiterated these principles in subsequent rulings, including Vihaan Kumar and others, reaffirming that service of grounds of arrest is mandatory and essential for safeguarding individual rights during arrest procedures OM PRAKASH GUPTA (A-1) vs STATE BY NCB, BZU P S - Karnataka, S.A. SIDDIQ ALIAS SIDDIQI ALIAS MUNICIPALITY SIDDIQ vs STATE OF KARNATAKA - Karnataka.
Analysis and Conclusion:
The core insight from these judgments is that procedural fairness in arrest—particularly the mandatory provision of written grounds—is a constitutional right protected under Articles 21 and 22. The rulings underscore that procedural lapses, such as failure to communicate grounds, can invalidate arrests. These principles are consistently reinforced across various cases involving different statutes, emphasizing their fundamental importance in safeguarding individual liberty and ensuring lawful arrest procedures.
Search Results for "Bansal and Purkayastha"
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 44015 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
(i) Key passages cited: the arrest memo and intimation lack grounds; decisions in Pankaj Bansal, Prabir Purkayastha, Vihaan Kumar ... In the decisions in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others , [(2024) 7 SCC 576] , Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) a href="./..
2024 0 Supreme(Kar) 647 • India - Karnataka
M. NAGAPRASANNA
. - The principles established in Pankaj Bansal, Prabir Purkayastha, and Arvind Kejriwal were distinguished as applicable primarily ... He would place heavy reliance upon 3 judgments of the Apex Court, in the cases of PANKAJ BANSAL v. UNION OF INDIA, PRABIR PURKAYASTHA and ARVIND KEJRIWAL supra. The Apex Court in the case of PANKAJ BANSAL has held as follows: “…. …. ….37. ... It is for the first time, the Apex Court in the case of PANKAJ BANSAL or PRABIR PURKAYASTHA ....
2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 39097 • India - High Court of Karnataka
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J
, Prabir Purkayastha, and Arvind Kejriwal. ... court held that failure to provide written grounds of arrest vitiates the arrest process, referencing precedents set in Pankaj Bansal ... Recently, in Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi), this Court reiterated the aforesaid principles expounded in Pankaj Bansal (supra). ... He would place heavy reliance upon 3 judgments of the Apex Court, in the cases of PANKAJ BANSAL v. UNION OF INDIA, PRABIR PURKAYASTHA and ARVIND KEJRIWAL sup....
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 20481 • India - Karnataka High Court
(Paras 22) ... ... (D) Precedents Cited - The court relied on judgments in Pankaj Bansal, Prabir Purkayastha, and ... The view taken in Pankaj Bansal [Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, (2024) 7 SCC 576 : (2024) 3 SCC (Cri) 450] was reiterated by this Court in Prabir Purkayastha [Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2024) 8 SCC 254 : (2024) 3 SCC (Cri) 573] , SCC p. 278) “28. ... Para 21 reads thus : (Prabir Purkayastha case [Prabir Purkayastha#HL_E....
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 43485 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bech u Kurian Thomas, J
(Paras 8-11; referred to decisions in Pankaj Bansal; Prabir Purkayastha; Vihaan Kumar; Shahina ... In the decisions in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others [ (2024) 7 SCC 576 ], Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) [ a href="./..
2025 0 Supreme(Bom) 123 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SARANG V. KOTWAL, S. M. MODAK, JJ
As discussed earlier, the cases of Pankaj Bansal, Ram Kishor Arora and Prabir Purkayastha deal with the provisions of PMLA and UAPA specifically as mentioned earlier. ... Shri Bhuta submitted that the ratio of Pankaj Bansal and Prabir Purkayastha apply to the cases involving even serious, grave and heinous offences because Section 50 of Cr.P.C. flows from Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. ... As we have discussed earlier, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had considered the provisions of PMLA and UAPA in the af....
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 47367 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
Its reliance on Pankaj Bansal and Prabir Purkayastha is misplaced, as those decisions turned on materially different facts and statutory contexts”.
2024 0 Supreme(AP) 1002 • India - Andhra Pradesh
B. V. L. N. CHAKRAVARTHI
State of Maharashtra, Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India and Prabir Purkayastha Vs. State of NCT of Delhi. ... The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madhu Limaye, Pankaj Bansal, Prabir Purkayastha and Vijay Madanlal Choudhary held that right to be ‘informed’ on the grounds of arrest under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India has no exception. ... Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India and others, 2024 (3) SCC 576 4. Prabir Purkayastha Vs. State of NCT of Delhi, 2024 SCC Online SC 934 5. Aravind K....
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 15911 • India - Karnataka High Court
S VISHWAJITH SHETTY, J
In view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal Vs Union Of India - (2024)7 SCC 576 and Prabir Purkayastha Vs State (NCT OF DELHI) (2024)8 SCC 254, wherein it is held that service of grounds of arrest on the accused who ... The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal (supra) and Prabir Purkayastha (supra) has been reiterated in the case of Vihaan Kumar VS State of Haryana and Another - 2025 SCC OnLine SC 269 by the Hon'ble Supreme
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 10586 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S VISHWAJITH SHETT, J
The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PANKAJ BANSAL (supra) and PRABIR PURKAYASTHA (supra) has been reiterated in the case of Vihaan Kumar vs State of Haryana and Another - 2025 SCC OnLine SC 269 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court ... The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal vs Union of India - (2024)7 SCC 576 and PRABIR PURKAYASTHA VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) (2024)8 SCC 254, has held that service of grounds of arrest on the accused who is arrested is mandatory and failure
Filter by Legal Phrase
