Grounds of Arrest Must Be Given in Writing, Even Under UAPA: Supreme Court Orders Prabir Purkayastha's Release

The Special Cell of Delhi Police registered FIR No. 224 of 2023 on 17.08.2023 under Sections 13, 16, 17, 18 and 22C of the UAPA read with Sections 153A and 120B IPC, and arrested the appellant, a director of PPK Newsclick Studio Pvt. Ltd., on 03.10.2023 at 5:45 p.m. (paras 3, 34). The computerised arrest memo had no column for the grounds of arrest (para 4). He was produced at the Remand Judge's residence before 6:00 a.m. on 04.10.2023, with a remand advocate he had not engaged, and remanded to seven days' police custody (paras 5, 34). The Delhi High Court rejected his challenge on 13.10.2023 (para 7).

Section 43B(1) of the UAPA is verbatim the same as Section 19(1) of the PMLA, so Pankaj Bansal's ruling that written grounds must be furnished applies equally to UAPA arrests (paras 17-19). Anyone arrested under the UAPA or for any other offence has a fundamental and statutory right to written grounds, the only effective means to consult a lawyer, oppose remand and seek bail (para 20). Rejecting the plea that Articles 22(1) and 22(5) do not require writing, the Court relied on Harikisan and Lallubhai Jogibhai Patel and held the two clauses identically worded (paras 25-30). A breach vitiates arrest and remand, and a charge sheet does not cure it (para 22). Pankaj Bansal, delivered on 03.10.2023, governed the remand of 04.10.2023 and binds all courts under Article 141 (paras 45-46). The arrest memo gave only formal 'reasons for arrest', not the personal 'grounds of arrest' (paras 48-49). The appellant's lawyer learnt of the remand around 7:00 a.m. and got the remand application only after it was granted; the lines recording his hearing were later insertions (paras 35-36, 39).