The Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi Police to add a column in the arrest warrant forms for recording the “reasons for arrest” of an accused.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said that a revised arrest memo form or some appendices would be added to ensure effective compliance with Section 50 of Cr.PC and corresponding Section 47 of BNSS, 2023.

The provisions state that any person who is arrested must be promptly informed of the specific offense and the reasons for the arrest.

Justice Sharma asked the Delhi Police Commissioner to ensure that necessary steps are taken to amend the arrest warrant forms.

“This court is of the opinion that there is an urgent need to update the arrest warrant forms in use. The arrest memo is formed as capitulated in this case and in the case of Prabir Purkayastha (supra) it clearly reveals that there is no column for recording the reasons for arrest related to the accused,” the Court said.

The remarks were made while dealing with a plea filed by an accused challenging his arrest by the Delhi Police in a matrimonial dispute. The FIR was registered last year under Section 498A, 406, 328, 376, 109 and 34 of the IPC.

The wife claimed that the couple entered into a secret marriage, but differences arose between them over time. She raised allegations of mental, physical and sexual abuse against her husband and his parents.

In the case of the accused, his arrest was carried out in violation of the principles of the law, as the reasons for the arrest were not communicated to him. He alleged that the investigating agency did not follow the mandatory requirements of the law and that the arrest note prepared at the time of his arrest did not disclose any reason for arrest.

Delhi Police said that though the arrest memo did not explicitly state the specific reasons for the arrest of the accused, but the said reasons were duly conveyed to him.

Declaring the arrest illegal and granting bail to the accused, the Court said that the “grounds for arrest” under Section 50 of Cr. The PC must be provided “immediately” to an accused.

“The court specifies that the present order was issued for the petitioner’s release for technical non-compliance with Section 50 Cr.PC. This court did not go into the merits of the case,” it states.

Advocates for Petitioner: Mr. Manu Sharma, Mr. Abhir Datt, Mr. Debayan Gangopadhyay, Mr. Anant Gupta, Mr. Kartik Khanna, Mr. Suryaketu Tomar, Advs

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC for the State with Mr. Sangeet Sibou, Mr. Jatin, Mr. Anikait Singh, Advs

Title: PRANAV KUCKREJA (IN POLICE CUSTODY) v. STATE (NCT DELHI)

Click here to read the order