The Supreme Court has granted bail to two medical professionals accused under the NDPS Act, holding that failure to provide written grounds of arrest violates fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution.
Background
In a landmark decision dated April 1, 2026, the Supreme Court of India granted bail to two medical professionals, Dr. Rajinder Rajan and Dr. Jatinder Malhotra, connected with the Corporate Hospital at Batala Road, Amritsar, in a case involving the alleged illegal possession of Tramadol tablets. This ruling reiterates the constitutional safeguards that mandate furnishing the accused with written grounds of arrest, emphasizing the protection of fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India.
Facts of the Case
The appellants, both medical practitioners—Dr. Rajinder Rajan being a senior orthopaedic surgeon and hospital owner, and Dr. Jatinder Malhotra the proprietor of Corporate Medicos, the pharmacy unit within the hospital—had placed an order for 200 Tramadol tablets from M/s Ballista Pharmaceuticals on April 19, 2025. However, due to a supply-side error, the hospital received 2000 tablets on April 21, 2025.
Upon noticing the excess quantity, the appellants asserted that they neither opened nor used the tablets, which remained sealed. They issued a letter dated April 27, 2025, requesting the return of the surplus stock.
NCB Action
Before the return could be processed, the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), Amritsar Zonal Unit, conducted a raid on May 1, 2025, at the premises of the supplier and recovered a large quantity of Tramadol tablets. Subsequently, a raid was conducted at the hospital pharmacy, where the 2000 tablets were recovered in sealed condition.
The appellants were summoned under Section 67 of the NDPS Act and were arrested on May 3, 2025, after recording their statements.
High Court Proceedings
Their bail applications were rejected by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, leading them to approach the Supreme Court.
Key Legal Issue
The central issue before the Court was whether failure to provide written grounds of arrest renders the arrest illegal.
Reliance on Mihir Rajesh Shah Case
The appellants relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra (2026), which mandates that the grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing. The Court had held that non-compliance with this requirement would render the arrest illegal.
Supreme Court’s Observation
The Supreme Court noted that the arrest memo only contained a standard statement indicating that the grounds were orally explained to the accused. However, no written grounds were furnished either before or after the arrest.
The Court held that mere oral explanation does not satisfy the constitutional requirement. Written communication of grounds of arrest is mandatory and must be provided within a reasonable time, preferably before production before the Magistrate.
Violation of Fundamental Rights
The Court held that failure to comply with this requirement amounts to violation of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution, thereby rendering the arrest illegal.
Final Order
Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals and directed that the appellants be released on bail, subject to furnishing bail bonds and conditions imposed by the trial court.
The judgment reinforces the importance of procedural safeguards and ensures that constitutional protections are upheld even in stringent cases under the NDPS Act.
Case Title: DR. RAJINDER RAJAN V. UNION OF INDIA & ANR
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath & Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Mehta
Case No: Criminal Appeal No. (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3326/2026
Date of Judgment: April 01, 2026
JOIN OUR WHATSAPP GROUP
