The written grounds-of-arrest requirement applies prospectively and cannot support bail for earlier arrests.

The applicant was arrested on 7 September 2025 in connection with a case under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 27(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Police alleged that 388 kg of ganja, cash and other articles were recovered from a truck intercepted near Kumhari Toll Plaza.

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, contending that he had not been properly informed of the grounds of arrest and that he had no criminal antecedents.

The State opposed bail, relying on the quantity seized and asserting compliance with the arrest requirements.

Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail, given the alleged recovery of 388 kg of ganja, a quantity above the commercial threshold.

Whether the applicant’s claim concerning non-furnishing of written grounds of arrest provided a basis for bail, where his arrest preceded the Supreme Court judgment establishing that requirement.

Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, provides the basis for an application for regular bail, while Section 47 of the BNSS concerns informing an arrested person of the grounds of arrest.

The Court applied Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra, (2026) 1 SCC 500, as interpreted in State of Meghalaya v. Sonam Raghuvanshi @ Bitti @ Bittu, SLP (Crl.) No. 11944/2026: the requirement to furnish grounds of arrest in writing introduced by Mihir Rajesh Shah operates prospectively.

The alleged offences were under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 27(a) of the NDPS Act.

The Court considered the alleged seizure of 388 kg of ganja—well above commercial quantity—and the applicant’s failure, at that stage, to provide a satisfactory explanation.

It therefore declined to accept the plea of false implication.

As the applicant was arrested on 7 September 2025, before Mihir Rajesh Shah was pronounced on 6 November 2025, the Court held that the later requirement of furnishing grounds of arrest in writing could not support his bail application.

It directed that a certified copy of the order be sent to the trial court for information and compliance.