Grounds Of Arrest Served To Accused After Four Minutes Of Actual Arrest Is Not Unreasonable: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday held that conveying grounds of arrest within four minutes of arresting an individual was 'reasonable' and the same does not violate any fundamental right of the accused. 

Single-judge Justice Dr Neela Gokhale was hearing a petition filed by a rape accused challenging his arrest arguing that he was not served with the 'grounds of arrest' in written, within a reasonable time and thus, his arrest was 'illegal.'

The man arrested on November 21, 2024 at 22:56 PM by the Mumbai Police and he was served with his grounds of arrest, in written at 23:00 PM. He was produced before a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) on November 22, 2024, which took note of the timeline of the arrest. The JMFC in its order noted that the accused was served with his grounds of arrest, four minutes after his 'actual arrest' and this breached his fundamental right to life and liberty. The JMFC relied on the ruling in the Prabir Purkayastha vs State, wherein it is mandated that the investigating officer must furnish a copy of the grounds of arrest in written to the accused at the time of his arrest. 

The said order was challenged before the Dindoshi Sessions Court, which by an order passed on December 24, 2024 quashed the JMFC's order stating that the four minutes time was well within the 'reasonable' time. The Sessions Court, therefore, ordered immediate arrest of the accused.

Before the High Court, the accused argued that the four minutes delay did violate his fundamental rights and he relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Prabir Purkayastha's case. He argued that the apex court has mandated that the grounds of arrest must be served 'simultaneously' while the accused is being arrested. 

However, Justice Gokhale, after considering the facts of the case and also the timeline, held that the four minutes delay is not 'unreasonable.'

"It is clear (from facts and timeline) that the police have scrupulously followed the legally mandated procedure. The grounds of arrest are conveyed to the Petitioner within 4 minutes of his arrest. The communication of the grounds of arrest are indicated based on the diary entry as well as the contemporaneous documents produced on record. There is no violation of any fundamental right of the Petitioner," the judge said in her order. 

With this, the bench upheld the Dindoshi Court's order.

Appearance: 

Advocate Sanjay Kumar Singh appeared for the Petitioner.

Chief Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegavkar assisted by Additional Public Prosecutor Aashish Satpute represented the State.

Case Title: Gunwant Tarachand Jain @ Nikesh Madhani vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Writ Petition 393 of 2025)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 57

Click Here To Read/Download Order