The Supreme Court has held that it is mandatory to provide written grounds of arrest to a person taken into custody for offences relating to terrorism and other charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
The court quashed the arrest and detention of Ahmed Mansoor and two others accused of various offences under the UAPA and the IPC.
The court, however, permitted the investigating agency to take fresh steps, including arresting the accused if necessary, after formally furnishing the grounds of such action.
A bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Vipul Panchol passed the order while allowing the appeal filed by Mansoor and the others challenging the view of Madras High Court that it was sufficient compliance of the law even if the accused were informed about the grounds of arrest by the trial court at the time of their production.
The accused had been charged by the local police and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) for offences punishable under Sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, etc), 153B (imputation, assertions prejudicial to national integration), 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC, and Sections 13 and 18 (relating to terrorism-related offence) of the UAPA.
The Supreme Court said that on the facts of the case, there was no dispute that the grounds of arrest had not been furnished either to the appellants or to the persons arrested with them. On the contrary, the only contention on behalf of the investigating agency was that the grounds of arrest were duly explained by the trial court at the time of remand, followed by the furnishing of a copy of the grounds of arrest to the lawyers.
“...We are inclined to hold that the present appeal deserves to succeed only on the ground that the mandate of furnishing the grounds of arrest at the time of securing the appellants has not been complied with,” the top court said.