The Supreme Court has expressed serious concern over its recent verdicts directing the supply of grounds of arrest to the accused booked under special laws, such as the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), being misused by the accused to demand such rights even in obvious offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih said that it would consider whether it was necessary to furnish grounds of arrest to the accused either before arrest or forthwith after arrest in every case, even when it involved IPC offences.
The Apex Court said it would also decide whether it was possible to furnish the grounds of arrest before or after arrest in exceptional cases and whether, in such cases, arrest would be vitiated due to non-compliance with Section 50 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
Noting that the accused in IPC cases were citing non-supply of grounds of arrest as a reason to file writ petitions before High Courts instead of filing bail petitions, the Bench said there should be a demarcation between grounds of arrest for offences under special statutes and those under the IPC.
The Bench said it did not want either the machineries to misuse their powers or the accused to take benefit of its observations by filing petitions under Section 438 and Article 226.
The top court of the country said it would consider whether a person is caught red-handed should be given the benefit of the grounds of arrest issue.
The Bench noted that in cases attracting offeces under PMLA, there would be questions, such as whether there was a predicate offence or whether tainted money was used. In such circumstances, supplying grounds of arrest to the accused was understood.
However, in offences under IPC, such as a person caught with 100 kg ganja, police could not say that it would first give the grounds of arrest after reaching the police station and arrest the person later.
Instead of filing bail pleas, the accused were filing petitions under Article 226, saying that since the grounds of arrest were not given, they should be released.
According to Section 50 CrPC, every police officer or person arresting any person without a warrant shall forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he has been arrested or other grounds for such arrest.
The Apex Court made these observations while hearing a batch of petitions.
The pleas included a petition filed by Mihir Shah, accused in the Worli BMW hit-and-run case, which led to the death of a woman in July 2024.
The accused contended that he was not supplied with grounds of arrest either before his arrest or at the time he was taken into custody on July 9, 2024. He argued that this went against the Apex Court judgment in the Pankaj Bansal case, which was further extended to offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in case of Prabir Purkayastha.
Representing Shah, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that a ‘hard case’ like this should not be used to make the law redundant.
Amicus Curiae in the case, Advocate Shri Singh, pointed out that a distinction must be made between general crimes and offences under special statutes.
Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhari, appearing in a connected matter, submitted that the law laid down in Pankaj Bansal was the law of the land under Article 141 and not just for PMLA.
The Bench gave an example of a person killing 10 persons and then stating that the grounds of arrest should be supplied before being taken into custody.
The Bench eventually decded to issue notice on the matter to settle the legal position.
Appearing in a connected matter, Advocate Karl Rustomkhan submitted that Article 22 ensured that the grounds of arrest were given.
He said this Court held in the case of Prabir Purkayastha that the language used in Article 22(1) and 22(5) regarding the supply of grounds of arrest was identical. The Apex Court had ruled that such a right was sacrosanct and could not be breached, he added.
The post Supreme Court to decide on whether to supply grounds of arrest to accused booked under IPC appeared first on India Legal.