-Mobile_581x360.webp)
In Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) case, SC stated that arrest of Prabir Purkayastha (Newsclick founder-editor) in Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) case is invalid as Delhi Police failed to inform the grounds of arrest before taking him into custody.
SC Observations
- Mandate under Pankaj Bansal v Union of India & Ors. Judgment that grounds of arrest must be provided to accused in writing will apply to cases under UAPA, 1967 as well.
- Earlier, under this judgement, SC held that grounds of arrest must be provided to persons accused under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.
- As provided under Articles 22(1) and 22(5) of Indian Constitution, communication of grounds of arrest or detention is sacrosanct and cannot be breached under any situation.
- Article 22(1): No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed of the grounds for their arrest.
- Article 22(5): A person under detention should be communicated the grounds of detention order and allowed to make a representation against detention.
About UAPA, 1967
|
