Grounds of arrest must be fully disclosed; incomplete arrest memo and statutory non-compliance rendered detention illegal.

Failure to communicate the grounds of arrest and to comply with the mandatory arrest-memo safeguards under Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Sections 47 and 48 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 rendered the arrest defective. The court held that merely mentioning the offence, the invoked sections, and routine arrest formalities did not satisfy the requirement to disclose the full particulars and supporting material for arrest. That non-compliance was treated as a breach of constitutional and statutory safeguards governing detention, and habeas corpus relief was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the arrest and remand of the arrestee were illegal for failure to disclose the grounds of arrest and comply with the mandatory arrest-memo requirements, and whether habeas corpus relief was maintainable.

Analysis: The arrest memo was tested against the requirements flowing from Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and the statutory safeguards under Sections 47 and 48 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Court found that the memo did not substantially contain the grounds and supporting material required by the prescribed format, and that mere intimation of the offence, sections invoked, and arrest-related formalities did not amount to compliance with the mandate to communicate full particulars of the grounds of arrest. Non-compliance with these requirements was treated as a breach of the constitutional and statutory safeguards governing arrest and detention.

Conclusion: The arrest and consequent remand were held illegal, and habeas corpus relief was granted.

Ratio Decidendi: Failure to communicate the grounds of arrest and to comply with the mandatory arrest-memo safeguards required by Article 22(1) and Sections 47 and 48 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 renders the arrest illegal and justifies release in habeas corpus proceedings.

---