Court Highlights Non-Compliance with Article 22(1) and NDPS Act in Arrest Procedures, Emphasizes Right to Personal Liberty
In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to Amritpal Kaur, a petitioner implicated under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, citing non-compliance with constitutional and statutory safeguards during her arrest. Justice Virinder Aggarwal presided over the case, underscoring the mandatory nature of Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution, which requires the communication of grounds of arrest to the arrestee in a language they understand.
The case stems from an FIR registered on 21st September 2025, involving the alleged smuggling and transportation of heroin through drones from Pakistan. Amritpal Kaur was implicated based on the disclosure statements of co-accused, despite no contraband being recovered from her. Her counsel argued her innocence, emphasizing the lack of incriminating evidence and highlighting procedural lapses during her arrest.
The court noted the failure to communicate the arrest grounds in writing to the petitioner or her nominated person, as mandated by Article 22(1) and Section 52(1) of the NDPS Act. This oversight rendered the arrest constitutionally infirm and legally unsustainable. The judgment draws on precedents set by the Supreme Court, reinforcing that any violation of Article 22(1) is grounds for immediate release, irrespective of statutory restrictions.
Moreover, the court considered Amritpal Kaur's prolonged incarceration of over nine months and her responsibilities as a mother to a minor child. It observed that her continued detention without due process served no purpose, warranting her release on bail. The court imposed several conditions to ensure compliance with the law, including restrictions on travel and requirements for address verification and financial disclosure.
This ruling emphasizes the judiciary's commitment to upholding constitutional rights and procedural fairness, particularly in cases involving serious allegations like those under the NDPS Act. It also highlights the judiciary's sensitivity towards female accused, especially those with caregiving responsibilities, in line with previous Supreme Court judgments.
Bottom line:-
Constitution of India, 1950 Article 22(1) Communication of grounds of arrest is a mandatory constitutional safeguard, and non-compliance renders the arrest constitutionally infirm and legally unsustainable.
Statutory provision(s): Article 21, Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, Section 52(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Amritpal Kaur @ Amrit Kaur v. State of Punjab, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2946723
