Arrest Memo Alone Was Not Enough: Madras HC Grants Bail To NDPS Accused Without Written Grounds Of Arrest

In brief

The question

1. Whether service of an arrest memo and oral explanation of the arrest, without written communication of the specific grounds, satisfied the requirement under Article 22(1) of the Constitution.

The court held

The Court set aside the remand order dated 22 August 2025 and allowed the petition.

It also directed

It directed the petitioner’s release on bail on a bond of ₹25,000 with two sureties for a like sum, subject to conditions including daily reporting to the respondent police at 10:30 a.m., non-abscondence and non-tampering with evidence or witnesses.

01Facts

The petitioner, arrayed as A2 in Crime No. 564 of 2025 under Sections 8(c), 22(b), 22(c), 25 and 29(1) of the NDPS Act, was arrested in a case involving alleged possession of LSD stamps and methamphetamine; the quantity attributed to him was 0.12 mg of LSD stamps.

p. 2

He challenged the Magistrate’s remand order dated 22 August 2025, contending that he had not been furnished the specific grounds of arrest in writing.

p. 5

The arrest memo recorded the alleged illegal possession and other particulars, and stated that the grounds had been orally explained.

p. 5, 8

The State maintained that he knew the circumstances of his arrest and had been orally informed of the reasons.

pp. 3–5

02Issues

i.1. Whether service of an arrest memo and oral explanation of the arrest, without written communication of the specific grounds, satisfied the requirement under Article 22(1) of the Constitution.

pp. 5–8

ii.2. Whether failure to furnish those grounds in writing vitiated the petitioner’s arrest and the consequent remand.

p. 8

03Law Applied

Article 22(1) of the Constitution requires that an arrested person be informed of the grounds of arrest.

Section 47(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, was invoked by the petitioner as requiring communication of the grounds.

p. 3

The Court relied on Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2025 INSC 1288, for the proposition that failure to communicate the grounds of arrest in writing at the time of arrest or immediately thereafter vitiates the arrest and subsequent remand.

p. 8

The Court distinguished specific “grounds of arrest”—the individual factual basis necessitating arrest—from generic “reasons for arrest” and routine particulars in an arrest memo.

pp. 6–7

Provisions in the judgment · 7 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528 Section 47

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 8 Section 22 Section 25 Section 29

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 50

04Reasoning

The arrest memo served on the petitioner conveyed the fact and particulars of arrest but did not set out the specific factual grounds for arrest.

pp. 5–7, 10

The Court held that generic reasons commonly applicable to arrests, or a statement that grounds were orally explained, did not establish compliance with the requirement to furnish the specific grounds in writing.

pp. 7–8

Applying Mihir Rajesh Shah, it concluded that the omission violated Article 22(1) and rendered the arrest and subsequent remand unsustainable.

p. 8