Supreme Court of India

Prabir Purkayastha v State (NCT of Delhi)

2024 INSC 41420241 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
The appellant was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and remanded to police custody. The grounds of arrest were not supplied to him in writing before the remand order was passed.
Issue
Whether the grounds of arrest must be furnished in writing to a person arrested under the UAPA, and the effect of failure to do so.
Held
The right to be informed of the grounds of arrest flows from Art.22(1) and is a fundamental right. Applying the reasoning of Pankaj Bansal v Union of India (2023), the grounds must be furnished in writing. Since this was not done before remand, the arrest and the remand order were invalid, and the appellant was ordered to be released on furnishing bonds.
Principle
The grounds of arrest must be furnished to the arrested person in writing; failure invalidates the arrest and remand.
Cite this

Facts

  • The appellant was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and remanded to police custody. The grounds of arrest were not supplied to him in writing before the remand order was passed.

Issue

  1. Whether the grounds of arrest must be furnished in writing to a person arrested under the UAPA, and the effect of failure to do so.

Held

  • The right to be informed of the grounds of arrest flows from Art.22(1) and is a fundamental right. Applying the reasoning of Pankaj Bansal v Union of India (2023), the grounds must be furnished in writing. Since this was not done before remand, the arrest and the remand order were invalid, and the appellant was ordered to be released on furnishing bonds.

Cite this

Citation

Prabir Purkayastha v State (NCT of Delhi) 2024 INSC 414

Reported: Supreme Court of India judgment (api.sci.gov.in). This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.