Karnataka High Court
Janardana Kanhar vs Union Of India on 4 June, 2025
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:18858
CRL.P No. 7572 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7572 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)
BETWEEN:
JANARDANA KANHAR
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
S/O BISAWARKANHAR,
R/O JIDINGI PADA VILLAGE,
KAMTANA POST, PIRINGYA TASIL,
KANDHAMAL DISTRICT,
ODISHA - 762 002
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAKSHITH R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU,
BENGALURU ZONAL UNIT,
REP. BY SPL.P.P.,
Digitally HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
signed by
CHANDANA BENGALURU - 560 001.
BM
Location:
High Court 2. R. SELVARAJ
of JUNIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
Karnataka
NCB, BENGALURU - 560 072.
3. CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT
CENTRAL PRISON,
PARAPPANNA AGRAHARA,
BANGALORE - 560 068.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H. SHANTHIBUSHAN, DSGI FOR R1 & R2;
SRI. MALLANAGOUDA H., HCGP FOR R3)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:18858
CRL.P No. 7572 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528
BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ARREST OF PETITIONER DATED
09.04.2023 AND REMAND ORDER DATED 10.04.2023 IN
SPL.C.NO.2180/2023 OF NCB BANGALORE ZONAL UNIT FOR OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 8(C) R/W 20(b)(ii)(c), 27A, 28 AND 29 OF
THE NDPS ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF XXXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE FOR NDPS ACT AT
BENGALURU AND CONSEQUENTLY RELEASE THE PETITIONER FROM
JUDICIAL CUSTODY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:
"The above named petitioner humbly pray that this
Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the arrest of petitioner
dated 09.04.2023 and remand order dated 10.04.2023 in
Spl.C.No.2180/2023 of NCB Bangalore Zonal Unit for
offence punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(c),
27A, 28 and 29 of the NDPS Act pending on the file of
XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and
Special Judge for NDPS Act at Bengaluru and
consequently, release the petitioner from judicial custody in
the interest of justice."
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
DSGI for respondents 1 and 3 as well as learned HCGP for 3rd
respondent and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged
in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned
NC: 2025:KHC:18858
HC-KAR
counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention to the material on
record in order to point out that except arrest memo dated
09.04.2023, which is said to be signed by the petitioner-accused
No.2, no separate / independent grounds of arrest was furnished or
communicated or intimated to the petitioner, thereby violating
Articles 21, 22(1) and 22(5) of the Constitution of India and Section
50 of Cr.P.C. (Section 47 of BNSS) and in the light of the
judgments of Pankaj Bansal vs. Union of India - (2024) 7 SCC
576, Prabir Purkayastha vs. State (NCT of Delhi) - (2024) 8
SCC 254, Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana - 2025 SCC
OnLine SC 269, Kasireddy Upender Reddy Vs. State of Andhra
Pradesh and Ors., - 2025 INSC 768, Radhika Agarwal Vs. Union
of India - 2025 INSC 272 as well as judgment of the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in Hemanth Datta Vs. State of Karnataka -
W.P.No.9302/2025 dated 17.04.2025, the impugned arrest memo
along with remand order deserves to be quashed and petitioner be
released on bail.
4. Per contra, learned DSGI and learned HCGP for the
respondents submit that arrest memo states that the grounds of
arrest have been communicated to the petitioner, which is sufficient
NC: 2025:KHC:18858
HC-KAR
compliance of requirement of law and as such, there is no merit in
the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
5. It is an undisputed fact borne out from the material on
record that except the aforesaid arrest memo, separate or
independent grounds of arrest have not been communicated /
intimated to the petitioner in writing at the time of his arrest. The
aforesaid arrest memo cannot be construed / treated as sufficient
/ strict compliance as enunciated in the aforesaid judgments. It is
also pertinent to note that except the arrest memo, no other
contemporaneous documents or materials have been produced by
the prosecution to establish that the grounds of arrest had been
communicated to the petitioner and his relatives as required in law,
in the absence of which, the impugned arrest and remand deserve
to be quashed.
6. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that in
the instant case, grounds of arrest have not been furnished or
communicated to the petitioner and / or to his relatives, friends etc.,
as required in law and in the light of the principles enunciated in the
aforesaid judgments, I am of the view that the petition deserves to
NC: 2025:KHC:18858
HC-KAR
be allowed and petitioner is entitled to be released on bail by
imposing certain conditions.
7. In the result, I pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned arrest of the petitioner on 09.04.2023 and
consequential remand dated 10.04.2023 passed in
Spl.C.C.No.2180/2023 by the XXXIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions
Judge and Special Judge for NDPS Act at Bengaluru, are hereby
quashed.
(iii) The 1st respondent as well as the 3rd respondent - Jail
Authorities are directed to release the petitioner on bail forthwith
immediately upon receipt of a copy of this order, subject to the
following conditions:
a) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly threaten or
tamper with the evidence, witnesses etc., of the respondents ;
b) The petitioner shall not involve in similar offences in
future;
c) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation;
d) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of this
Court without the prior permission of the Court;
e) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum
of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum, to the
NC: 2025:KHC:18858
HC-KAR
satisfaction of the Trial Court within a period of two weeks from
today.
f) The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the
SHO of the jurisdictional police station between 10.00 a.m.
and 02.00 p.m., once in two weeks.
g) Liberty is reserved in favour of the Trial Court to take
appropriate action against the petitioner including issuance of
NBW against the petitioner, in the event he violates any of the
terms and conditions mentioned above.
Registry is directed to communicate this order to the 1st
respondent as well as the 3rd respondent - Jail Authorities forthwith
without any delay both electronically and telephonically to enable
immediate implementation of this order.
Hand delivery of this order is permitted.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)
JUDGE
MDS/SRL
