- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14896 CRL.P No. 4886 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4886 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. MS. EULALIA DA SILVA PEREIRA D/O PEDRO ARAUJO PEREIRA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT SIMAO RODRIGUES MOREIRA STREET, SAO PAULO SP (MOEMA GARDEN) BREZIL PIN 13010 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVARAJU T.A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CUSTOMS AIR INTELLIGENCE UNIT (AIU-D) KEMPEGOWDA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, BENGALURU-560300 REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE OFFICE AT ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE HIGH COURT BUILDING, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001 2. THE CHIEF SUPERITENDENT CENTRAL PRISON AND COREECTIONAL SERVICE, PARAPPANA AGRAHARA, ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BENGALURU-560100 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. UNNIKRISHNAN M., ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI. JAGADISH B.N., ADDL. SPP WITH Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14896 CRL.P No. 4886 of 2025 SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ARREST MEMO DATED 30.01.2025 PRODUCED AT ANNEUXRE-C IN CONNECTION WITH C.NO.VIII/48/228/2024-25 AIU- D CUS OF SUPERINTENDENT OF CUSTOMS FOR OFFENCES P/U/S 22,23,28,29 OF NDPS ACT WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE XXXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL.JUDGE (NDPS) AT BENGALURU CITY CONSEQUENTLY RELEASE THE PETITIONER FROM THE CUSTODY OF RESPONDENT NO.2. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER The petitioner, who has been arrested in relation to the crime for the offences punishable under Sections 22, 23, 28 and 29 of the NDPS Act, is before this Court seeking relief. 2. The petitioner was arrested on 30.01.2025 and remanded to judicial custody. The petitioner's primary contention is that the arrest stands vitiated due to the failure to disclose the grounds of arrest, which is in violation of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. In support of this contention, he places reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of VIHAAN KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR., in SLP Criminal No.13320/2024. 3. In response, the learned counsel representing the respondent submitted that the materials prima facie disclose the commission of the offences alleged against the petitioner, and that the petitioner was arrested after following due process of law. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14896 CRL.P No. 4886 of 2025 Therefore, it cannot be said that the arrest in violation of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. 4. The arguments of the learned counsel for the parties have been duly served. 5. The petitioner has annexed the arrest memo, wherein it is stated that the grounds of arrest were explained to the petitioner at the time of arrest. However, no document has been produced to substantiate that the grounds of arrest were served on the petitioner or that the contents were explained in a language understood by the petitioner. 6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2025 INSC 162, has ruled that as far as Article 22(1) is concerned, compliance can be made by communicating sufficient knowledge of the basic facts constituting the grounds of arrest to the person arrested . The grounds should be effectively and fully communicated to the arrestee in the manner in which he will fully understand the same. Therefore, it follows that the grounds of arrest must be informed in a language which the arrestee understands. 7. A coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P No.6578/2019 had issued guidelines stating that as soon as the offence under Foreigners Act and other Laws is detected, and there is a strong prima facie material to show that the detected person is a foreign national, and if the said person has no passport or visa, or if the visa is expired, and he has no right to stay in Indian Territory, proceedings shall be immediately undertaken to deport - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14896 CRL.P No. 4886 of 2025 such foreign national to his nation, without unnecessary delay, from the date of registration of FIR against such person. 7.1. It was further held that if for any reason the Court grants bail including anticipatory bail, in any criminal case where the offender is a foreign national, and the offences are under the Foreigners Act and/or also under any other Laws for the time being in force, and if their visa was cancelled or lapsed, or if they had no passport, or if they were ill+egal immigrants, then the Courts shall specifically order to keep such persons in detention centers, unless the competent authority has passed any order under section 3(2)(a) to (f) of Foreigners Act, 1946. 8. In light of the above, the arrest of the petitioner stands vitiated for non-compliance of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, and the petitioner is entitled to relief from judicial custody. ORDER i. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The arrest memo dated 30.01.2025 issued by the respondent at Annexure - Counsel in case No.VIII/48/228/2024-25 AIU-'D' CUS is hereby quashed. ii. The respondent No.2 is hereby directed to release the petitioner forthwith. Subject to the following conditions: iii. Petitioner shall furnish personal bond for a sum of Rs.1 lakh with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14896 CRL.P No. 4886 of 2025 iv. The petitioner shall appear before the 1st respondent for the investigation as and when summoned. v. The petitioner shall not territorial limits of the 1st respondent without permission. vi. The petitioner shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses in whatsoever manner. vii. Registry to communicate this order to the 2nd respondent through electronic mail. 9. It is open for the respondents to move the Registration Officer appointed under Rule 3 of the Foreigners Rules. 10. It is also made clear that under Section 3(2) of the Foreigners Act, if the Competent Authority feels that by means of imposing restrictions on the movements of the petitioner, by taking bond - with or without surety, or in alternative to the enforcement of any of the prescribed or other specific restrictions or conditions, so as to observe or control the movements of the petitioner, such orders may be passed by the Competent Authority with intimation to the concerned Court. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4