Punjab & Haryana High Court: Written Grounds of Arrest Mandate in Pankaj Bansal Ruling Applies Prospectively

Post By 24law
February 20, 2025

Pranav B Prem

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has clarified that the requirement of furnishing written grounds of arrest, as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, will only apply prospectively from October 3, 2023—the date on which the judgment was pronounced.

Legal Context and Court's Observations

The High Court, while ruling on a bail plea, reiterated the Supreme Court’s stance in Pankaj Bansal, which made it mandatory for investigating agencies, including the Directorate of Enforcement, to furnish written reasons for arrest. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi observed, “The proposition of law that emerges is that the grounds of arrest must be supplied in writing to an accused but the law as laid down in Pankaj Bansal (supra) is to supply is prospectively after 03.10.2023 i.e. the date on which the judgment in Pankaj Bansal (supra) was pronounced.”

Case Background

The High Court was considering a bail application filed in connection with a murder case under Sections 302, 34 of the IPC, 1860 and Sections 25 and 29 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused, Anurag @ Arjun, Ravinder (petitioner), and Sandeep @ Koki conspired to kill the deceased, Sumit. The confessional statement of co-accused Anurag @ Arjun indicated that he fired at the deceased with a country-made pistol, while the petitioner allegedly inflicted Danda (stick) blows, and Sandeep @ Koki inflicted leg and fist blows. The petitioner contended that no specific role was attributed to him beyond the alleged confessional statement of his co-accused and his own confessional statement, which has limited evidentiary value. The defense further relied on the Supreme Court’s Pankaj Bansal ruling, arguing that no written grounds of arrest were provided to the petitioner at the time of his arrest.

Court’s Analysis and Precedents Considered

The High Court examined the applicability of the Pankaj Bansal ruling and took into consideration the subsequent Supreme Court judgment in Ram Kishor Arora v. Directorate of Enforcement, which explicitly held that the Pankaj Bansal decision would only apply prospectively. A bench comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma ruled that non-furnishing of written grounds of arrest before October 3, 2023, could not be deemed illegal. Justice Bedi cited this ruling, observing, “The judgment in Pankaj Bansal (supra) would supply prospectively inasmuch as the grounds of arrest were required to be supplied only if the arrest was after 03.10.2023 i.e. the date when the judgment in Pankaj Bansal (supra) was passed.”

Additionally, the Supreme Court’s decision in Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) was also considered, wherein the Apex Court emphasized that from October 3, 2023, onwards, failure to furnish written grounds of arrest would render an arrest illegal.

Verdict

Since the petitioner in the present case was arrested on February 23, 2022, much prior to the Pankaj Bansal ruling, the High Court held that he could not claim any benefit under the judgment. The plea for bail was accordingly dismissed. The ruling reaffirms that while Pankaj Bansal established a crucial safeguard for arrested individuals, its application remains strictly prospective, shielding past arrests from any retrospective challenges based on non-furnishing of written arrest grounds.