New Delhi, March 30, 2025: The Supreme Court of India has set aside the arrest and remand of Ashish Kakkar, citing non-compliance with Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The ruling aligns with the Court’s earlier decision in Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) – (2024) 8 SCC 254, which mandates that the grounds of arrest be furnished in writing.
Ashish Kakkar v. UT of Chandigarh
Criminal Appeal No. 1518/2025
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 367
Supreme Court Bench and Legal Representatives
- Bench: Justices MM Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal
- Petitioner’s Counsel: Senior Advocate Siddharth Aggarwal
- Respondent’s Counsel: Advocate Bhuvan Kapoor
Background
Ashish Kakkar was arrested in December 2024 in connection with an FIR registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including extortion (Section 384), cheating (Section 420), forgery (Sections 468 & 471), outraging the modesty of a woman (Section 509), and criminal conspiracy (Section 120B). Following his arrest, he was remanded to police custody for three days.
Kakkar challenged his arrest and remand before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which declined to interfere. He then appealed the January 30, 2025, High Court ruling before the Supreme Court.
Key Arguments in Appeal
Kakkar’s legal team challenged his arrest and remand on three grounds:
- Non-compliance with Section 41A CrPC – Procedure for issuing a notice before arrest.
- Denial of the right to be heard at the time of remand.
- Failure to provide written grounds of arrest.
Supreme Court’s Ruling
The Supreme Court focused on the third ground—non-furnishing of the grounds of arrest—and ruled in favor of the appellant. The bench observed that the arrest memo provided only minimal details, including:
- Name of the accused
- Place of arrest
- A statement that the arrest was based on the co-accused’s statement
The Court held that the arrest memo lacked any “worthwhile particulars” regarding the charges framed against Kakkar. It noted:
“We are in agreement with the submission made by the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant that the said arrest memo cannot be construed as grounds of arrest, as no other worthwhile particulars have been furnished to him. This, being a clear non-compliance of the mandate under Section 50 of the Code which has been introduced to give effect to Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, 1950, we are inclined to set aside the impugned judgment, particularly, in light of the judgment rendered by this Court reported as Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) – (2024) 8 SCC 254.”
Legal Precedent and Implications
The ruling reinforces the Supreme Court’s stance in Prabir Purkayastha v. State (2024), which held that failure to furnish written grounds of arrest directly violates Section 50 CrPC and Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution.
By setting aside the arrest and remand, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the importance of procedural safeguards in protecting citizens from unlawful detention.
Conclusion
This landmark judgment highlights the necessity of adhering to due process while making arrests. Authorities must now ensure that proper written grounds for arrest are furnished; otherwise, the arrest and remand will not stand legal scrutiny.
Stay tuned for more legal updates and Supreme Court judgments. Follow us for the latest news on constitutional rights, criminal law, and judicial rulings.
Keywords: Supreme Court India, Ashish Kakkar Arrest, Prabir Purkayastha Case, Section 50 CrPC, Unlawful Arrest, Criminal Law, Supreme Court Judgment 2025
