- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17946 CRL.P No. 6265 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6265 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MANOJ D R @ MANOJA D R S/O RAMAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/A JAVAREGOWDA NAGARA PRESENT HOSAKERALLI, KRISHNAPPA LAYOUT, BENGALURU, BENGALURU CITY (AS PER CHARGESHEET) MANOJ, D.R S/O RAMAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS NO. 52 1ST CROSS, JAVAREGOWDANA DODDI RR NAGAR, BANGALORE SOUTH BANGALORE KARNATAKA-560098 (AS PER ADHAR CARD) (JUDICIAL COUSTODY) 2. KIRANA MA S/O ANNAIAH SWAMY AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS BAPUJI NAGARA MORI ROAD NEAR BEERESHWARA TEMPLE, BENGALURU, BENGALURU CITY KARNATAKA (AS PER CHARGE SHEET) Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17946 CRL.P No. 6265 of 2025 KIRANA M A S/O ANNAYYA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS KRISHNARAJAPETE TALUK SANTHE BACHANAHALLI HOBLI MAVINAKATTE KOPPALU MALAGUR, MANDYA KARNATAKA 571436 (AS PER ADHAR CARD) (AS PER CHARGE SHEET) 3. KOUSHIK S @ KADU S/O SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS VEERABHADRA SIGNAL, GIRI NAGARA, BENGALURU BENGALURU CITY KARNATAKA (AS PER CHARGESHEET) KOWSHIK S AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS S/O SHRINIVASA, TOLALI MULUKATTE, NAGAMANGALA, MANDYA, KARNATAKA-571432 (AS PER ADHAR CARD) (JUDICIAL COUSTODY) 4. RAJA BABU @ RAJU S/O ANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS NO 368 2ND MAIN ROAD CHALAGHATA, KENGERI, BENGALURU BENGALURU CITY KARNATAKA RAJABABU A AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS S/O ANJINAPPA NO 368 2ND BEEDI, KENGERI HOBALI CHALAGHATTA, KUMBALAGODU BANGALORE SOUTH, BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560060 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17946 CRL.P No. 6265 of 2025 (AS PER ADHAR CARD) (JUDICIAL COUSTODY) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. UTSAV GOWDA P. S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA KADUR POLICE REP BY SPP HIGH COURT COMPLEX BANGALORE -560001. 2. CHIEF SUPRITENDANDENT DISTRICT PRISON CHIKMAGALUR-577101 (BOTH ARE REP BY SPP HIGH COURT COMPLEX BANGALORE -560001) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482(FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ARREST DATED 16.02.2024 AND REMAND ORDER DATED 17.02.2024 PASSED IN CR.NO.34/2024 ON THE FILE NO. S.C.NO.59/2024 PENDING BEFORE HONBLE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHIKKAMAGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 302,201,120-B R/W SEC.34 OF IPC SET ASIDE THE ORDER REMANDING THE PETITIONER TO JUDICIAL CUSTODY RELEASE THE PETITIONER FORTHWITH. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER The petitioners (accused Nos.1 to 4), who were arrested on 16.2.2024 in Crime No.34/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120-B read with Section 34 of IPC are before this Court seeking relief. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17946 CRL.P No. 6265 of 2025 2. The primary contention of the petitioners is that the grounds of arrest were not served at the time of arrest, and therefore, the same is in violation of Article 22(1) of Constitution of India. 3. The learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent on instructions submitted that grounds of arrest were not served on the petitioner. The said submission is placed on record. 4. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vihaan Kumar -vs- The State of Haryana & Another, reported in (2025) 2 SCR 424 has reiterated that the requirement of informing the person arrested of the grounds of arrest is not a mere formality, but a mandatory constitutional 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 - who is 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, it would amount to a violation of the fundamental right of the arrestee as guaranteed under Article 22(1). It will also amount to depriving the arrestee of his liberty, to effectively challenge the arrest. Article 21 of the Constitution states that no person can be deprived of his - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17946 CRL.P No. 6265 of 2025 liberty, except in accordance with the procedure established by law. 5. In the light of the decision of the Apex Court in the aforesaid case, the arrest of the petitioners stands vitiated for violation of Article 22 (1) of the Constitution of India and in such circumstances, the petitioners are entitled to be released from judicial custody. 6. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. 7. The Chief Superintendent, District Prison, Chikmagalur, is hereby directed to release the petitioners forthwith from judicial custody, if they are not required any other case in SC No.59/2024, pending on the file of the learned I Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Chikmagalur arising out of Crime No.34/2024 registered by the Kadur Police, subject to the following conditions: i) The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court within a period of two weeks from the date of their release; ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses; iii) The petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court as and when summoned; - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:17946 CRL.P No. 6265 of 2025 iv) The petitioners shall not involve in similar offences in the future; v) The petitioners shall not leave the territorial limits without prior permission of the Trial Court. 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 BKM, List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2