Relevance: GS Paper II – Polity & Governance (Fundamental Rights, Judicial Safeguards)
Source: The Hindu, Supreme Court Judgment
What’s the News?
In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court, led by Justice B.R. Gavai, held that police must inform an arrested person of the grounds of arrest in writing, in a language they understand, and at least two hours before being presented before a magistrate.
Concept: Preventive Arrest vs Arbitrary Arrest
Concept | Explanation |
| Preventive Arrest | Detention to prevent an individual from committing an offence or disturbing public order. Legal basis under Article 22(3) and laws like the National Security Act, 1980 (NSA). |
| Arbitrary Arrest | Arrest without reasonable cause or failure to inform the person of the reason—violates Articles 21 and 22 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty). |
| Statutory Safeguards | – Article 22(1): Right to be informed and consult a lawyer. – Section 50(1), CrPC: Obligation to disclose grounds of arrest. – D.K. Basu Guidelines (1997): Procedures for lawful detention, arrest memo, medical check-up. |
Key Supreme Court Guidelines and Cases
Case | Judgment / Significance |
| D.K. Basu vs State of West Bengal (1997) | Established procedural safeguards during arrest and custody. |
| Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar (2014) | Limited automatic arrests in offences punishable up to seven years. |
| Prabir Purkayastha Case (2024) | Extended written communication of arrest grounds to all offences—upholding personal liberty and dignity. |
The 2024 ruling extends this safeguard to all offences, not just under stringent laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA)—strengthening protection of personal liberty and ensuring procedural fairness.
Significance
- Reinforces Article 21 – Right to Life and Liberty and Article 22 – Safeguards for Arrest and Detention.
- Promotes transparency, accountability, and procedural fairness in law enforcement.
- Protects citizens against state excesses under stringent laws, ensuring rule of law and dignity.
Challenges and Way Ahead
Challenges | Way Forward |
| Misuse of stringent laws like UAPA, PMLA, NSA leading to prolonged pre-trial detentions. | Periodic judicial review of preventive detention laws and bail provisions to prevent misuse. |
| Arrests made without written justification or oversight. | Mandatory written record and digital tracking of arrest reasons. |
| Police overreach and lack of training on procedural rights. | Regular training and accountability mechanisms for police officials. |
| Delay in legal recourse and weak legal aid access. | Strengthen legal aid frameworks under NALSA and ensure early magistrate supervision. |
UPSC Prelims Practice Question
With reference to the Supreme Court’s rulings on arrest procedures in India, consider the following statements:
- The Court has made it mandatory for police to communicate the grounds of arrest in writing to the accused.
- The protection extends even to cases under special laws like the UAPA and PMLA.
- Preventive detention is completely prohibited under Article 22 of the Constitution.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (a)
One-line Wrap:
The Supreme Court’s directive against arbitrary arrests strengthens India’s procedural justice system, ensuring that liberty is not left to the discretion of authority but protected by the rule of law.
Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!
Start Yours at Ajmal IAS – with Mentorship StrategyDisciplineClarityResults that Drives Success
Your dream deserves this moment — begin it here.