Habeas Corpus Petition Upheld; Court Emphasizes Mandatory Compliance with Section 35 of BNSS and Constitutional Rights under Articles 21 and 22
In a significant judgment delivered on October 23, 2026, the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) in the case of Innisai v. State of Tamilnadu set aside the arrest and remand of Inspector Sugumaran, holding the detention illegal due to non-compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, and constitutional protections under Articles 21 and 22 of the Indian Constitution.
Sugumaran, an Inspector of Police with the District Crime Branch, Thanjavur, was arrested in connection with offences under Sections 61 (criminal conspiracy), 308(2) (extortion), and 198 (public servant disobeying law) of BNSS, 2023. The case originated from a complaint linked to a partnership dispute between hospital partners, Saravanan and Jeyasri Ramasamy. The complaint was initially investigated by Sugumaran but later transferred to CB-CID following allegations of bias.
The arrest followed Sugumaran's compliance with a notice issued under Section 35(3) BNSS directing him to appear before the police for questioning. The police arrested him after interrogation on the same day without recording reasons in writing justifying the necessity of arrest, as mandated by Section 35(5) BNSS. The Court emphasized that this provision is peremptory, prohibiting arrest without documented reasons once the noticee complies with the notice. No material was placed on record by the prosecution to show compliance with this mandatory requirement.
Furthermore, the Court found that the detenu was not served with the grounds of arrest, violating Article 22(1) of the Constitution. The trial magistrate's dismissal of this non-service on the basis that the accused was a police officer and his wife an advocate was strongly criticized as "shocking and untenable." The Court reiterated that informing the arrested person of the grounds of arrest is a sacrosanct constitutional mandate and cannot be waived or ignored irrespective of the accused's status.
The Court also expressed serious doubts about the prosecution's use of an alteration report to substitute the original accused with a new accused on a completely different factual matrix without giving the victim notice as required under Section 15A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The alteration report was criticized for mixing distinct causes of action, which is not ordinarily permissible.
While the Court did not delve into the merits of the allegations against Sugumaran, it underscored that constitutional protections apply to all individuals equally, regardless of their position or character. The Court held that illegal arrest and detention are violations of fundamental rights and warrant immediate relief through Habeas Corpus.
Consequently, the Madras High Court ordered the unconditional release of Sugumaran forthwith, declaring his arrest, detention, and remand illegal. The Court clarified that this order is not a grant of bail but a direction for release due to illegality of detention, leaving the merits of prosecution open for trial.
This judgment reinforces the importance of strict adherence to procedural safeguards in arrests and remands, particularly the compliance with notice provisions under BNSS, and the constitutional right to be informed of grounds of arrest, thereby strengthening the rule of law and protection of individual liberty.
Bottom Line:
Habeas Corpus Petition is maintainable to challenge arrest and remand if detention is illegal for non-compliance with statutory and constitutional safeguards; where accused complied with notice under Section 35(3) BNSS, arrest without recorded reasons under Section 35(5) BNSS and without service of grounds of arrest violates Articles 21 and 22 and renders arrest, detention and remand illegal.
Statutory provision(s):
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 35, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 15A, Constitution of India Articles 21, 22
Innisai v. State of Tamilnadu, (Madras)(DB)(Madurai Bench) : Law Finder Doc Id # 3001718
