Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

43. From a reading of the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prabir Purkayasta's case supra, it is very clear that post Pankaj Bansal's case i.e., from 03.10.2023, the requirement of serving the grounds of arrest on the accused immediately after his arrest as provided under Section 50(1) of Cr.PC and Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India is

- 59 -

NC: 2024:KHC:51482 & SIX CONNECTED CASES mandatory and failure to comply the said requirement would entitle the accused for bail.

45. In the present case, accused nos.1, 2, 11, 12 & 14 were arrested on 11.06.2024 and accused nos.6 & 7 were arrested on 14.06.2024. Perusal of the order sheet of the committal

- 61 -

NC: 2024:KHC:51482 & SIX CONNECTED CASES court would go to show that no mention is made in the order sheet about service of memo of grounds of arrest on the aforesaid accused immediately after their arrest. All that is mentioned in the order sheer is about service of check list, arrest memo, arrest intimation and inspection memo. According to the learned Counsel for the accused, the memo of grounds of arrest were served much after the accused were arrested and the same was not served immediately after their arrest. Perusal of the memo of grounds of arrest of accused no.11 who was arrested on 11.06.2024 would go to show that the same is signed by CW-79 - Madhusudhan, whose statement under Section 161 of Cr.PC was recorded only on 15.06.2024. In the said statement, he has not stated anything about he being present at the time of arrest of the accused person or about he signing the memo of grounds of arrest.

46. The memo of grounds of arrest of accused no.12 dated 11.06.2024 has been signed by CW-76 - Kiran who is the alleged eye-witness to the incident in question. The statement of CW-76 under Section 161 of Cr.PC was recorded on 15.06.2024 and his statement under Section 164 of Cr.PC was recorded on 22.06.2024. This witness has also not stated

- 62 -

NC: 2024:KHC:51482 & SIX CONNECTED CASES anywhere about he signing the memo of grounds of arrest on 11.06.2024 or about his presence at the time of arrest of accused no.12 on 11.06.2024.

47. The memo of grounds of arrest of accused nos.1 & 14 has been signed by CW-73 - Nagesh and his statement under Section 161 Cr.PC has been recorded on 14.06.2024. Even this witness has not stated anything about he being present on 11.06.2024 when accused nos.1 & 14 were arrested nor has he stated about he signing the memo of grounds of arrest.

48. If the contention of the prosecution that memo of grounds of arrest were served on the accused immediately after their arrest is accepted, then the question arises as to why there was inordinate delay in recording the statement of these witnesses, more so the statement of prime eye-witness CW-76 - Kiran. Since the witnesses during the course of their statement have not stated anything about they being present at the time of arrest of the accused persons, or about they signing the memo of grounds of arrest, a serious doubt arises with regard to the contention put forward by the prosecution that memo of grounds of arrest were served on the accused