D/L 207 28.03.2025 Kausik ct.no.35 W.P.A. 6877 of 2025 Minu Das Versus State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra Mr. Rameswar Sinha Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharyya …for the petitioner. Mr. Souma Subhra Ray Mr. Arijit Roy Ms. Neelam Kumari Ms. Monalisha Singha …for the respondent nos. 5 & 6. Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Sr. St. Counsel …for the State. Petitioner has approached this court being arrested in connection with New Barrackpore PS Case No. 65/2025 under the relevant provisions of the BNS. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the police authorities without affording any opportunity under section 35(3) of the BNSS on the same day arrested the petitioner. On the other hand, rebutting such contentions State submits that a checklist was prepared and considering the reasons assigned or 2 available with the police authorities, arrest was effected and considered necessary. Without going into the merits of the case and adhering to the dictum of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Prabir Purkayastha vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (2024) Vol. 8 Supreme Court Cases 254 and Vihaan Kumar vs. State of Haryana and Anr. (2025) SCC Online SC 269 wherein it has been held that the reasons of arrest and grounds of arrest are two separate entities which are to be handed over in writing to the accused before his application for bail is preferred pursuant to his arrest, in the court of the learned Magistrate. I am of the opinion that since the grounds of arrest in this case were not communicated to the present petitioner nor there are any documents to substantiate that the same was orally communicated and a general diary entry maintained regarding such communication being made available or in the alternative any document was furnished before the court at the time when such communication was made to the petitioner, I am of the view that the procedure for arrest so adopted by the investigating agency is illegal. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled to be released. Petitioner would furnish his bond before the learned ACJM, Barrackpore. So far as the 3 conditions and the terms of bond are concerned, the same would be decided by the learned ACJM, Barrackpore. However, State will not be precluded from taking steps in respect of the guidelines incorporated in Vihaan Kumar vs. State of Haryana & Anr. If the respondent nos. 5 and 6 approach the Investigating Officer expressing insecurity, the police authorities would take steps in accordance with law after seeking necessary directions from the learned Magistrate in consonance with the provisions of Witness Protection Scheme, 2018. With the aforesaid observations WPA 6877 of 2025 is disposed of. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)