Grounds Of Arrest Have To Be Communicated In Meaningful & Comprehensive Manner: Punjab And Haryana High Court Declares Music Producer’s Arrest Illegal

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has declared the arrest of music producer Pushpinder Pal Singh Dhaliwal illegal, ruling that he was not informed of the grounds for his arrest at the time of detention, in violation of constitutional and legal safeguards.

The High Court observed that the arrest memo was prepared seven hours after his detention, rendering the arrest procedurally flawed and unlawful. The habeas corpus plea was filed by Dhaliwal’s daughter, who contended that he was taken into custody on the evening of March 8, 2025, without any arrest memo. 

The Single Bench of Justice Harpreet Singh Brar underscored that the right to be informed of arrest grounds is a fundamental safeguard under Article 22(1) of the Constitution.

The Court held that merely providing arrest details in a mechanical manner does not satisfy constitutional requirements—such information must be conveyed meaningfully and comprehensibly to allow the arrestee to respond effectively. "Article 21 of the Constitution of India bestows the precious and most cherished fundamental right to liberty on individuals, which is directly curtailed when one is placed under arrest. Given the gravity of the same, the duty to communicate the grounds of arrest in a meaningful and comprehensible manner becomes all the more imperative," the Single Bench observed. 

Court’s Observations on Procedural Violations

The Court further emphasized that the guidelines laid down in D.K. Basu’s case exist to enhance transparency, prevent police abuse, and ensure accountability. It also cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana, which mandates that grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing.

Illegal Detention and Police Non-Compliance

The Court noted that no FIR or complaint was registered against Dhaliwal at the time of his arrest. The Warrant Officer, appointed by the Court, reached the police station at 12:40 AM on March 9, 2025, and found that no arrest memo had been prepared in compliance with Section 50 of the CrPC (now Section 47 of BNSS, 2023).

It was only at 2:26 AM that the SHO handed over the FIR and arrest memo, with the Warrant Officer signing the documents at 2:30 AM, more than seven hours after Dhaliwal’s detention. The Court ruled that such procedural lapses amounted to a violation of Article 21, making the arrest unlawful ab initio.

Limits on Warrant Officer’s Powers

The Court also clarified that a warrant officer’s role is purely ministerial, limited to conducting searches and reviewing police records. It held that the Warrant Officer has no adjudicatory power to comment on the legality of an arrest, and any such remarks in their report were beyond jurisdiction.

"...this Court would also like to clarify that the role of a Warrant Officer is ‘ministerial’ in nature since his duty is confined to conducting a search for the person of the detenu at the said premises and examine all the material available, including contemporaneous record of the police station which may justify the custody. However, the Warrant Officer has no adjudicatory power to either comment or draw a conclusion with respect to the legality or illegality of the said custody," it said. 

Court Orders Release, Terms Arrest ‘Illegal’

Concluding that Dhaliwal’s detention violated Articles 21 and 22, along with statutory safeguards under BNSS, the Court ordered his immediate release and declared his arrest illegal. The ruling reaffirms the judiciary’s commitment to upholding constitutional protections against unlawful detention and arbitrary police action.

The Court noted, "In the present case, the warrant officer has erroneously made certain remarks in the last paragraph of his report, recording a finding on the legality of detention. As such, this Court has no hesitation in deprecating the conduct of the warrant officer and in holding that the warrant officer exceeded his jurisdiction in commenting on the merits of the case."

"...the present petition is allowed, and the detenu, namely Pushpinder Pal Singh Dhaliwal @ Pinky Dhaliwal, father of the petitioner, detained at Police Station Mataur, S.A.S. Nagar, is ordered to be released immediately if his custody is not required in connection with any other case. Consequently, the arrest of the detenu in connection with FIR(supra) stands vitiated and is declared illegal," the Court ordered. 

Cause Title: Gurkaran Singh Dhaliwal v. State of Punjab and Another [Neutral Citation No. 2025:PHHC:036906]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Senior Advocate R.S. Rai (through Video Conferencing), Vinod Ghai, Amit Jhanji, Advocates Gautam Dutt, Harlove Singh Randhawa, Shiv Kumar Sharma, Satinder Pal Singh, Jashan Bains, Arjun S. Rai, Gursher Singh, G.S. Dhillon, Arnav Ghai, Dhruv Trehan, Shashank Shekhar Sharma

Respondent: Addl. AG Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G. Deeepender Singh

Click here to read/download the Judgment