The SC ruled that police and investigating agencies must provide written grounds of arrest
The judgment by CJI B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih stemmed from the 2024 Worli BMW crash case.
The Court ruled that not providing written arrest grounds in time will make the arrest illegal.
In a landmark judgment enhancing the rights of arrested persons, the Supreme Court on Thursday, November 6, 2025, ruled that police and investigating agencies must furnish written grounds of arrest. This right is to be given to every arrested person as soon as possible, irrespective of the offence or the law under which the arrest is made.
The verdict, delivered by a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, emphasized that the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest is a fundamental safeguard under Article 22(1) of the Constitution. The Court clarified that this protection applies to all offences, including those under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and that the grounds must be communicated in writing and in a language the accused understands.
The ruling arose from the 2024 Worli BMW crash case in Mumbai, involving accused Mihir Rajesh Shah. The Bench stated that if immediate written communication is not possible, the reasons must first be conveyed orally, but written grounds must still be provided within a reasonable time—no later than two hours before the accused is produced before a magistrate for remand proceedings. Non-compliance, the Court warned, would render the arrest and remand illegal, entitling the person to immediate release.
The Court further directed that remand papers must include the written grounds of arrest and, if delayed, a note explaining the cause. Where documentary material already forms the basis for arrest, written grounds must be supplied at the time of arrest. Only in exceptional cases—such as offences committed in flagrante delicto—would oral communication suffice initially, with written reasons to follow.
This judgment followed the Bombay High Court’s earlier decision to uphold the Worli BMW crash arrest despite procedural lapses. The Supreme Court, however, chose to examine whether written grounds of arrest are mandatory in all cases, including those under the BNS 2023.
Citing constitutional and statutory provisions, the Bench noted that Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 47 of the BNS (previously Section 50 of the CrPC) require that every arrested person be informed of the grounds of arrest and their right to bail. Section 48 of the BNS (formerly Section 50A of the CrPC) mandates that these grounds also be communicated to a person nominated by the arrestee.
The Court referred to earlier rulings such as Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023), Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2024), and Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana (2025), all affirming that informing the accused of the grounds of arrest is a constitutional necessity linked to the right to life and liberty under Article 21.
Reiterating that Article 22(1) enables the accused to prepare a defense and ensures fair treatment, the Bench said written communication of arrest grounds will prevent arbitrary detentions and enhance accountability in the justice system. “The ends of fairness and legal discipline therefore demand that this procedure, as affirmed above, shall govern arrests henceforth,” the Court concluded.
This ruling establishes a uniform standard of due process across all laws and investigative agencies. It marks a significant step forward in protecting individual liberty and reinforcing constitutional safeguards. [Rh]
Suggested Reading:
