The Delhi High Court has ruled that arrested individuals must be informed of the grounds for their arrest immediately and provided sufficient time to consult legal counsel before remand hearings.

The Single Bench of of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambani emphasized that Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) mandates that law enforcement agencies must "forthwith" communicate the grounds for an arrest made without a warrant.

The Court interpreted the provision strictly, stating that the arresting officer must serve the grounds of arrest simultaneously with the issuance of the arrest memo.

The Court further clarified that the right to legal consultation is a fundamental safeguard against arbitrary detention. "Sufficient time must be given to an arrestee after the grounds of arrest have been served upon him in writing, to enable the arrestee to engage and confer with legal counsel. The test is that the arrestee must have a meaningful opportunity to resist his remand to police custody or judicial custody," the Court observed.

The ruling came in response to a plea by petitioner Marfing Tamang, who challenged a May 2024 trial court order remanding him to police custody in a rape case. Tamang, a manager at an establishment, was accused of facilitating sexual exploitation and financial gain from such activities. He was arrested and remanded to police custody for two days on May 18, 2024, followed by 14 days of judicial custody.

Contentions Raised

Advocate Adit S Pujari appeared for the petitioner, and Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Utkarsh appeared for the State.

The petitioner argued that his arrest and remand were unlawful, highlighting discrepancies in the official records. While the remand order stated that he was arrested at 6:30 PM on May 17, the Investigating Officer’s status report indicated that he had arrived at the police station around 11:30 AM that day at the instruction of the police. Further, the petitioner contended that the remand application failed to specify the exact offences alleged against him, violating the mandatory requirements of Section 50 CrPC (now replaced by Section 47 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023).

The State countered that the grounds of arrest were provided to Tamang on May 18 at 4:40 PM and that there was no legal obligation to include them in the remand application. However, the High Court rejected this argument, holding that the failure to inform the petitioner of the grounds for his arrest immediately rendered the arrest unlawful.

Court's Observation

The Court also set aside the magistrate’s decision to remand him to police custody, noting that he was given the grounds for arrest only an hour before the remand hearing, depriving him of a fair opportunity to contest his detention.

"Furnishing the grounds of arrest in writing just about an hour before the remand hearing cannot possibly be due or adequate compliance with the requirements of Section 50 Cr.P.C., which mandates that grounds of arrest must be communicated to an arrestee forthwith—that is to say, simultaneously and immediately upon the arrest of such person," the Court held.

Cause Title: Marfing Tamang v. State [Neutral Citation No. 2025: DHC: 672]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocates Adit S Pujari, Shaurya Mittal

Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Utkarsh

Click here to read/download the Judgment