New Delhi, November 2025: In a landmark judgment with far-reaching implications for policing and personal liberty, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that every person arrested, regardless of the nature of the offence, must be informed in writing of the reasons for their arrest.
Delivering judgment in Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra (Criminal Appeal No. 2195 of 2025), a Bench led by Justice Augustine George Masih reaffirmed that the constitutional protection under Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 47 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) is mandatory and non-negotiable.
The case arose from the arrest of Mihir Rajesh Shah, accused of a fatal hit-and-run incident in Mumbai involving a high-speed BMW in July 2024. Shah contended that his arrest was unconstitutional because the police did not provide him with the written grounds of arrest.
The Core Issue
The Supreme Court considered two key questions:
- Whether the police must provide written grounds of arrest in every case, including offences under the general criminal law (BNS 2023, earlier IPC 1860).
- Whether failure to furnish such written grounds immediately would invalidate the arrest.
The Court’s Findings
After examining previous rulings, including Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2024), Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2024), and Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana (2025), the Court held that:
- The right to be informed of the grounds of arrest is a fundamental right.
It flows from Article 22(1) and Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution. - Written communication is essential.
Reading out reasons orally is insufficient; the arrested person must receive a written document in a language they understand. - This rule applies to all cases, whether under general criminal law or special laws such as UAPA or PMLA.
- Exceptions allowed only for immediate emergencies.
In rare, urgent situations, for example, when an officer witnesses a crime in progress, the police may first inform the accused orally, but must provide written grounds within a reasonable time, and at least two hours before the person is produced before a magistrate.
Why It Matters
The Court emphasised that arrest is not a mere procedural act, it directly affects personal liberty, reputation, and dignity.
Justice Masih noted that “to achieve the intended objective of Article 22(1), the grounds of arrest must be furnished in writing in the language the arrestee understands.”
The Court warned that non-supply of written grounds violates the Constitution and renders the arrest and subsequent custody illegal, entitling the person to be released.
A Step Toward Greater Police Accountability
The judgment also reaffirms obligations under Section 48 of BNSS 2023, which requires police to inform an arrested person’s relatives or nominated contacts about the arrest and its reasons.
By setting a clear standard for communication and documentation, the Court seeks to prevent misuse of arrest powers and to ensure transparency in criminal procedure.
The Broader Significance
This ruling harmonises India’s criminal process with global human rights standards, which stress the importance of informing detainees promptly and clearly about the reasons for their arrest.
It also strengthens the emerging judicial trend of protecting citizens against arbitrary arrest, a theme seen in earlier decisions like Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. and Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
In Summary
The Supreme Court’s decision in Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra establishes a new constitutional benchmark:
- Written grounds of arrest are now mandatory.
- They must be in a language the person understands.
- Failure to comply makes the arrest unlawful.
- Even in emergencies, written grounds must follow within two hours before the first remand hearing.
In essence, the ruling transforms a long-standing principle of justice, that liberty cannot be curtailed without due process, into a more enforceable, citizen-friendly right.