Apex court’s directions for giving grounds of arrest in writing to accused is not applicable for offences under IPC or KCOCA: Karnataka High Court

High Court of Karnataka clarifies grounds of arrest in writing not required for IPC or KCOCA cases, except preventive detention.

The directions of the apex court for giving grounds of arrest in writing to the accused persons under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, are not applicable to the offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or the Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act (KCOCA), 2000, or any arrest under any penal law, the High Court of Karnataka has said. This is applicable to all except in cases of preventive detention.

As provisions of the IPC and the KCOCA do not mandate divulgence of the grounds of arrest in writing, the accused in such cases is entitled only to information under Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. PC), which mandates that information of grounds of arrest has to be given to the accused, the High Court said.

“If grounds of arrest is to be informed [in writing] as is held by the apex court in the cases of Pankaj Bansal, Prabir Purkayastha, and Arvind Kejriwal in every arrest on any cognisable offence, it would undoubtedly open Pandora’s box of interpretation of what could be the grounds of arrest, and mushroom huge litigation before the constitutional courts” when there are a large number of criminal cases registered every day in about 20,000 police stations across the country, the High Court said.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna made these observations while holding the arrest of John Moses D. alias Madan Kumar, who is facing about 110 criminal cases for land-grabbing, against whom provisions of KCOCA have been invoked.The court dismissed his petition, in which he had challenged his arrest claiming that grounds of arrest were not given to him in the manner prescribed by the apex court in its three judgments related to the UAPA and PMLA cases.

The High Court pointed out that the provisions of the UAPA and the PMLA make it mandatory to provide the grounds of arrest to the persons arrested under the provisions of these laws.

Moreover, the apex court holds it mandatory to give grounds of arrest in writing in its three judgments — in the cases of Pankaj Bansal, Prabir Purkayastha, and Arvind Kejriwal — owing to the fact that enlargement of an accused for the offences under the UAPA and the PMLA on grant of bail is extremely limited, the High Court said.

“The burden to prove that an accused is not guilty begins at the threshold. It is in fact a reverse burden on the accused. It is, therefore, in such cases the grounds of arrest should be informed to the accused” in the manner prescribed by the apex court, the High Court pointed out.