The Kerala High Court has granted bail to accused in three cases under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Cases), 2025, on the ground that the grounds of arrest were not communicated as mandated by the Supreme Court.
While in the first two case, a single judge bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath noted in its orders Friday (February 6) that the grounds of arrest were not communicated to the relatives of those arrested, in the third case, it concluded that the grounds of arrest were not communicated either to the arrestee or his relative.
Granting bail to accused Rameez Abdul Razak, Abdul Rahman and Ramjith, a Single Judge bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath said “it is now well settled that the requirement of informing a person of the grounds for arrest is a mandatory requirement of Art.22(1) of the Constitution and Section 47 of BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) and absence of the same would render the arrest illegal.”
The court pointed out that the Supreme Court in its 2025 decision in Kasireddy Upender Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh “has held that the grounds of arrest should not only be provided to the arrestee but also to his family members and relatives so that necessary arrangements are made to secure the release of the person arrested at the earliest possible opportunity so as to make the mandate of Art.22(1) meaningful and effective, failing which, such arrest would be rendered illegal.
The single judge said that in the first two cases, “perusal of the records show that the grounds of arrest have been communicated to the arrestee properly. However, in the intimation given to the relative of the applicant, there was no proper communication of the grounds of arrest including the quantity of the contraband seized from the possession of the applicant.”
The High Court added, “inasmuch as the grounds of arrest were not communicated to the relatives of the’ applicants, “the arrest stands vitiated and” they are “entitled to be released on bail.”
In the third case, it said “on a perusal of the case diary, it is noticed that the grounds of arrest were not communicated to the applicant or the relative under Sections 47 and 48 of the BNSS, Article 22(1) of the Constitution and the dictum laid down in the aforementioned decisions. Hence, the arrest of the applicant is vitiated”
In the first case, accused Razak and co-accused, were found in possession and transportation of 52.242 grams of methamphetamine on June 3, 2025, in a Honda City car bearing registration No. KL-07-BN-3399 which was found lying in a landed property of one Latheef Haji.
In the second case, accused Rahman was found in possession of 18.275 kgs of ganja and 1.994 kgs of hashish oil.
In the third case, accused Ramjith was found in possession of and transporting 3.020 grams of ganja, 0.230 grams of MDMA and 0.140 grams of LSD Stamp.
Opposing their bail plea, the Senior Public Prosecutor had said that the grounds of arrest were duly communicated.
