- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17630 CRL.P No. 5700 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5700 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: MUNIKRISHNA S/O LATE GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT NO. 1303, 3RD CROSS TOWER-1, DAMMANGI SUMMA, LEAVES APARTMENT, RAGHUVANAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 062. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAM SINGH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY THALAGHATTAPURA POLICE STATION BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OFKARNATAKA BANGALORE - 01. 2. PUTTAGOWRAMMA W/O LATE GOPI AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, NO. 11, 1ST FLOOR, C/O SUBBANNA, NEAR ELUMUDDAMMA TEMPLE, KOTTANURU MAIN ROAD, Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17630 CRL.P No. 5700 of 2025 HARINGARA, BENGALURU CITY - 01 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.V. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED REMAND ORDER DATED 25.03.2024 PASSED BY THE II A.C.J.M BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU IN CR.NO.98/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302 OF IPC BY THALAGHATTAPURA POLICE. 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 is an accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC was arrested on 24.3.2024 in crime No.98/2024 registered by the Thalaghattapura Police Station, is before this Court seeking relief. 2. The petitioner was arrested on 24.3.2024 at about 9.00 p.m, and was produced before the learned Magistrate on - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17630 CRL.P No. 5700 of 2025 26.3.2024 at about 10.00 p.m., and officially the arrest of the petitioner was on 25.3.2024 at 5.15 p.m. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner cannot be detained in judicial custody for more than 24 hours without an order of remand by the learned Magistrate as stated under Section 57 of Cr.P.C, and at the time of arrest, the grounds of arrest has not been disclosed, and the petitioner has been arrested and the same stands vitiated as being violative of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and Section 57 of Cr.P.C. In support, the learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vihaan Kumar -vs- State of Haryana & anr. - in 2025 INSC 162. 4. The learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 submits that the grounds of arrest were disclosed at the time of arrest and the same cannot be said to be violative under the law. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17630 CRL.P No. 5700 of 2025 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. The perusal of the order sheet maintained by the learned Magistrate indicates that the petitioner was produced on 26.3.2024 at about 10.p.m., along with the copies of arrest memo as well as intimation of arrest made to the relatives of the accused. The petitioner has produced the arrest memo dated 25.03.2024 indicating that the petitioner has been arrested in relation to crime No.98/2024 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and the said intimation does not disclose the grounds of arrest. In the remand application, it is stated that, the petitioner was arrested on 24.3.2024 at 9.00 p.m. Therefore, the petitioner was detained for 24 hours without obtaining an order of remand from the learned Magistrate as stated under Section 57 of Cr.P.C. 7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vihaan Kumar (supra) following the earlier decision has held that the requirement of informing the person arrested of the grounds of arrest is not a formality but a mandatory constitutional - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17630 CRL.P No. 5700 of 2025 requirement. Article 22 is included in Part III of the Constitution under the heading of fundamental rights. Thus, it is the fundamental right of every person arrested and detained in custody to be informed of the grounds of arrest as soon as possible. if the grounds of arrest are not informed as soon as may be after the arrest, if would amount to a violation of the fundamental right of the arrestee guaranteed under Article 22(1). It will also amount to depriving the arrestee of his liberty. The reason is that, as provided in Article 21, no person can be deprived of his liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law. 8. In the light of the foregoing, the arrest of the petitioner stands vitiated for non-compliance of the provisions contained in Section 57 of Cr.P.C., and under Article 22(1) and (2) of Constitution of India. Therefore, the petitioner has established a prima facie case to release him from judicial custody forthwith. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:17630 CRL.P No. 5700 of 2025 9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. 10. The Chief Superintendent of Central Prison, Parappana Agrahara, Bengaluru, is hereby directed to release the petitioner forthwith from judicial custody in S.C.No. No.311/2024, on the file of the learned II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru arising out of Crime No.98/2024 registered by the Thalaghattapura Police Station, subject to the following conditions: i) The petitioner-accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum of which, one will be the Local Surety to the satisfaction of the Trial Court within a period of two weeks from the date of his release; ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses; iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court as and when summoned; - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:17630 CRL.P No. 5700 of 2025 iv) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Jail Authorities concerned forthwith without any delay through e-mail and telephonically. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE HR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 190