Recently, the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that failure to comply with the mandatory requirement of Section 47(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) renders the arrest and subsequent detention illegal and observed that mandate of Section 47(1) BNSS is peremptory, and once violated, the only consequence is to declare the arrest and detention invalid.
Brief Facts:
The detenue was arrested on 24.02.2025 at 9:00 P.M. by the police and produced before the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class FAC, Vijayawada, on 25.02.2025 at 5:45 P.M. The remand report submitted by the police did not contain a statement that the intimation of arrest under Section 47(1) BNSS was served on the detenue. The Magistrate endorsed that arrest intimation was not given and that the remand report did not contain all the sections added in the alteration memo. The police resubmitted the report at 11:10 P.M., claiming that the detenue was informed about the reasons for arrest but refused to receive the notice. The intimation was allegedly sent via WhatsApp to the cousin of the detenue, which was contested as improper. The petitioner, wife of the detenue, filed the writ petition challenging the remand on the ground of clear violation of Section 47(1) BNSS.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the arrest was illegal as there was no compliance with Section 47(1) BNSS, which mandates immediate communication of the grounds of arrest to the accused.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The State contended that the detenue refused to receive the notice, which prevented compliance. It was also argued that the detenue was produced within 24 hours, and the remand procedure was in accordance with the law.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that the language of Section 47(1) BNSS requires that full particulars of the offence or grounds of arrest be communicated to the accused immediately at the time of arrest or without delay thereafter. It was observed that the remand report merely stated the time and place of arrest, without recording any effort made to serve the arrest intimation or any refusal by the detenue.
The Magistrate’s endorsement that no intimation under Section 47(1) BNSS was served on the detenue, according to the Court, clearly indicated non-compliance. Given these facts, it was held that no step had been taken to serve the required intimation and that the absence of any such effort rendered the detention illegal. The Court held that failure to comply with this mandatory provision vitiates the legality of the arrest and any subsequent detention. It was reiterated that the requirement of informing the arrested person of the grounds of arrest is a sacrosanct constitutional and statutory right, the violation of which renders custody illegal.
Reliance was placed on Prabhir Purkayastha, which affirmed that non-compliance with the duty to communicate the grounds of arrest would make the detention illegal. It was further observed that instead of releasing the detenue upon finding that the intimation was not given, the Magistrate merely returned the remand report for compliance, which reflected non-application of mind. The Court clarified that the mandate of Section 47(1) BNSS is peremptory, and once violated, the only consequence is to declare the arrest and detention invalid.
The decision of the Court:
The Court set aside the remand order dated 25.02.2025 and ordered the immediate release of the detenue from District Jail, Nellore.
Case Title: Motakatla Jhansi Vani Reddy vs The State of Andhra Pradesh & Others
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice R Raghunandan Rao, Hon’ble Dr. Justice K Manmadha Rao
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 5444 of 2025
Advocate for the Applicant: Papudippu Sashidar Reddy
Advocate for the Respondent: Advocate General
Picture Source :
