(વિહાન કુમાર ના જજમેન્ટ બાદ અટક વખતે ના જે મુદ્દા ઉપસ્થિત થયેલ હતા . તે મુજબ હવે આ જજ્મનેટ મુજબ પોલીસે અટક કરતા પહેલા 2 કલાક પૂર્વે લેખિત માં અટક ના કારણ જણાવવા ના રહેશે . ) એરેસ્ટ મેમો એ અટક ના કારણ નથી .
Non Communication of ground of Arrest to accused person is voilative of Art 21 of Constitution, hence arrest illegal, accused entitled to bail.
MIHIR RAJESH SHAH VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER , SC, CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2195 OF 2025
52. We thus hold, that, in cases where the police are already in possession of documentary material furnishing a cogent basis for the arrest, the written grounds of arrest must be furnished to the arrestee on his arrest. However, in exceptional circumstances such as offences against body or property committed in flagrante delicto, where informing the grounds of arrest in writing on arrest is rendered impractical, it shall be sufficient for the police officer or other person making the arrest to orally convey the same to the person at the time of arrest. Later, a written copy of grounds of arrest must be supplied to the arrested person within a reasonable time and in no event later than two hours prior to production of the arrestee before the magistrate for remand proceedings. The remand papers shall contain the grounds of arrest and in case there is delay in supply thereof, a note indicating a cause for it be included for the information of the magistrate.
53. The above indicated lower limit of two hours minimum interval before the production is grounded in the functional necessity so that the right as provided to an rrestee under the Constitution and the statute is safeguarded effectively. This period would ensure that the counsel has adequate time to scrutinize the basis of arrest and gather relevant material to defend the arrestee proficiently and capably while opposing the remand. Any shorter interval may render such preparation illusory, thereby resulting in non-compliance of the constitutional and statutory mandate. The two-hour threshold before production for remand thus strikes a judicious balance between safeguarding the arrestee’s constitutional rights under Article 22(1) and preserving the operational continuity of criminal investigations.