The Supreme Court of India has reserved its order on a key legal issue in the Worli hit-and-run case involving Mihir Shah. The Court is considering whether it is mandatory to provide written reasons for arrest before or immediately after an arrest in all criminal cases, including those under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih took up this issue during a hearing on Mihir Shah’s plea against the Bombay High Court's order rejecting his release. Shah argued that his arrest was illegal as the police failed to furnish the grounds for arrest in writing.
"The question we are called upon to answer is whether it is necessary to furnish grounds of arrest in every case, even under IPC, before or immediately after arrest," the bench noted.
Senior Advocate Dr. AM Singhvi, appearing for Shah, argued that no written grounds were given even after nearly ten months of custody. He stressed that in serious cases, the police cannot skip this requirement altogether. He said, “Hard cases must not lead to bad law.”
Read also:- Supreme Court Directs Direct Bank Transfer of Compensation to Road Accident Victims and Workers
In response, the State of Maharashtra's counsel said the accused was informed about the arrest orally in the presence of witnesses, and the father was notified via phone. She cited the urgency, as Shah had been absconding and was caught by police from another station.
Justice Gavai remarked:
"Ordinarily, even after arrest, why should the grounds not be communicated within 24 hours? In exceptional circumstances, exceptions are understood."
The Court also heard from Advocate Shri Singh, the Amicus Curiae, who laid out legal precedents and constitutional principles, including Article 22, which guarantees that an arrested person must be informed of the grounds of arrest.
"The right to be informed of arrest grounds flows from Article 22 and Section 50 of CrPC," the Amicus stated.
"But there’s no mandate that it must be in writing — only that it should be supplied ‘as soon as may be possible’."
He explained that in situations involving public pursuit or emergencies, it's reasonable to explain the arrest reasons after the arrest. He emphasized that courts can later verify from police records whether the accused was informed.
Read also:- Supreme Court: Land Value Under RFCTLARR Act Must Be Based On Section 11 Notification Date
Justice Masih questioned:
"Why can’t the grounds be supplied in writing before remand?"
The Amicus replied that though advisable, current law doesn’t strictly require it. Still, the police must show proof that grounds were indeed communicated.
The case also included similar petitions involving other accused, where bail was granted due to completed chargesheets and long custody periods. The Court’s final decision will apply to all connected cases.
During arguments, Justice Gavai expressed concern:
"Should police really wait to furnish written grounds even if someone is caught red-handed committing a serious crime? Should law ignore ground realities?"
Despite Singhvi's concerns about possible misuse of such a ruling, the Court reassured that it aims to balance police power and accused rights.
"We don’t want accused misusing our observations to bypass legal remedies," Justice Gavai said.
Case Title: Mihir Rajesh Shah vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., SLP(Crl) No. 17132/2024 (and connected cases)
