Not furnishing grounds of arrest do not render custody illegal or entitle the accused to bail

Delhi High Court Upholds Custody of Saad in Murder Conspiracy Case Alleged Procedural Lapses in Arrest Do Not Warrant Bail, Court Affirms

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has dismissed the petition filed by Saad, challenging his arrest in connection with a murder case registered under Sections 302, 201, 120B, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Saad had contended that his arrest was illegal due to procedural lapses, specifically the failure to provide written grounds of arrest and discrepancies in the recorded time of his arrest. However, the Court, presided over by Dr. Swarana Kanta Sharma, J., concluded that these procedural lapses did not cause demonstrable prejudice or deny Saad a fair opportunity to defend himself, thus they do not warrant his release on bail.

The case pertains to the alleged murder of Shahbaz, with the prosecution accusing Ayesha's brothers, Salman and Zeeshan, of orchestrating the crime, supported by Saad. It is alleged that Saad provided the murder weapon and recorded the act on his mobile phone, which was later recovered and sent for forensic analysis.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the absence of written grounds of arrest and the alleged incorrect recording of the arrest time violated his constitutional rights under Article 22(1). However, the Court held that substantial compliance with informing the grounds of arrest suffices, and the absence of written documentation, without demonstrable prejudice, constitutes a curable defect. The Court emphasized that Saad was aware of the grounds of his arrest, as he was represented by legal counsel during the remand proceedings and was actively pursuing bail applications.

Furthermore, the Court noted that discrepancies in the arrest memo regarding the time of arrest are matters for trial and cannot be adjudicated at this stage. It was observed that no objections were raised during the remand proceedings, and the allegations of incorrect timing lacked substantiation.

In its judgment, the Court cited the Supreme Court's decision in State of Karnataka v. Sri Darshan, reiterating that procedural lapses in furnishing grounds of arrest do not render the custody illegal unless they cause demonstrable prejudice. The Court concluded that Saad's petition lacked merit and dismissed it accordingly, while clarifying that the judgment does not reflect on the merits of the case.

Bottom Line:

Alleged procedural lapses in furnishing grounds of arrest, without demonstrable prejudice, do not render custody illegal or entitle the accused to bail under Section 302 IPC.

Statutory provisions:  

• Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 201, 120B, 34  
• Constitution of India - Article 22(1)  
• Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 50

Saad v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2817182