Nueva Delhi: The Supreme Court has ruled that the investigating agencies have the duty to inform foundations of arrest against the defendant while they stopped them and the breach of it would make the arrest illegal. He said that the requirement to inform arrest reasons is not a “formality but a mandatory constitutional requirement.”
A Bank of Judges Abhay S Oka and NK Singh annulled an arrest made by the Gurgaon Police, saying that the defendant had not been informed of the reasons for his arrest. Although the court refrained from approved an order in the mode of communication of arrest, he said it would be better if it was communicated in writing, since the burden would be in the police to demonstrate that the arrest reasons were communicated.
The court must release accused if Right to freedom Violated: SC
In a concurrent but separate order, Judge Singh said that the requirement of communicating the reasons for written arrest is not only for the arrested person, but also for friends, family or other people who can be revealed or nominated by the arrested person. The court said that the right to be informed about the reasons for the arrest flows of article 22 (1) of the Constitution and any infraction of this fundamental right would vitiate the process of arrest and preventive detention. He said that a police officer cannot “casually” arrest a person in a cognable crime, and that he could only be done when credible information was received.
The bank said: “Therefore, the requirement to inform the person arrested for arrest reasons is not a formality but a mandatory constitutional requirement. Article 22 It is included in part III of the Constitution under the heading of Fundamental rights. Therefore, it is the fundamental right of each person arrested and detained in custody to be informed of arrest reasons as soon as possible.
“If arrest reasons are not reported as soon as possible after arrest, it would be equivalent to a violation of the fundamental right of arrest guaranteed in article 22 (1). It will also be equivalent to depriving the arrest of their freedom. The reason is that , according to the provisions of article 21, no person can be deprived of their liberty, except in accordance with the procedure established by law. “
In addition, he said: “The procedure established by the law also includes what is provided in article 22 (1). Therefore, when a person is arrested without a court order, and the reasons for arrest are not informed so soon As after the arrest, it will also be equivalent to a violation of its fundamental right guaranteed by virtue of article 21 “.
The court said that arrest motives must be informed in a language that the arrested understands and argued that it is the duty of the courts to determine if compliance with article 22 (1) and other mandatory safeguards have been made while paying the accused.
“When a violation of article 22 (1) is established, it is the duty of the Court immediately order the liberation of the accused. That will be a reason to grant the bond even if there are legal restrictions in the bail concession. There is the statutory the restrictions do not affect The power of the Court to grant bail when the violation of articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution is established, “he said.