# Umang Rastogi & Anr v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2026) 1 ILRA 1172
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2026-01-22
- **Case number:** Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 35 of 2026
- **Bench:** Siddharth, Jai Krishna Upadhyay
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/umang-rastogi-anr-v-state-of-u-p-ors-54769
- **Pages:** 16

## Text

1172 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
under Section 202 CrPC have been considered by the Magistrate and thereafter, the summons have
been issued.

25. After going through the aforesaid factual aspect, this Court cannot weigh the evidences.
Certainly, the trial is required. This Court, under Section 482 CrPC, cannot record the finding
whether the applicants are innocent or not. In the case of Aryan Singh (Supra), Hon'ble Supreme
Court has categorically held that the High Court has materially erred in going in detail in the
allegations and the material collected during the course of the investigation against the accused.

26. The Court is not required to conduct the mini-trial, at this stage of discharge/quashing of
the criminal proceedings. Similarly, in the case of Sampelly Satyanarayana Rao (Supra),
Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that while dealing with a quashing petition, the court has
ordinarily to proceed on the basis of averments in the complaint. The defence of the accused cannot
be considered at that stage. The court, considering the prayer for quashing does not adjudicate upon
a disputed question of fact. Similarly, in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. (Supra),
law is propounded by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of
which is sought, the court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or
otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint.

27. After aforesaid factual and legal discussion and in view of observations made by Hon'ble
Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 14790 of 2023, this Court is of the opinion that
the case requires trial and this Court, in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC, cannot
interfere in the case.

28. The application is accordingly rejected.

29. No order as to costs.
----------
(2026) 1 ILRA 1172
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 22.01.2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J.
THE HON'BLE JAI KRISHNA UPADHYAY, J.

Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 35 of 2026

Umang Rastogi & Anr. ...Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Issue for Consideration
Whether arrest of an accused has been made without following the procedure established by law, and the
police officials have acted in high handed manner and when it was pointed out to the learned Magistrate, he
1 All. Umang Rastogi & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1173
has also not applied his judicial mind to the requirements of law before affecting arrest of petitioner no. 1 and
rejected the prayer of petitioner.

Head Notes
The Constitution of India, 1950-Article 22(1) & 226; The Code of Criminal Procedure-1973Sections 50 & 50A; The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023-Sections 47 & 48- The arrest memo does
not contain any column regarding grounds of arrest of the petitioner- 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- The arrest of the petitioner was absolutely illegal and
against the requirements of the arrest memo prepared by respondents themselves. The purpose
of preparing the arrest memo was frustrated by the SubInspector of Police.
Held- The violation of the aforesaid legal provisions by any police officer, while affecting arrest an accused,
by not disclosing the grounds of arrest as per clause 13 of the memo of arrest, would amount to the
misconduct of dereliction of duty by police official concerned and he shall be liable for being proceeded
departmentally, after being placed under suspension, so that he may not perpetrate this illegality any more-
The impugned remand order and order dated 27.12.2025 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), F.T.C. /
Gautam Buddanagar in Case Crime No. 750 of 2025 under Section 317(2) and 317(4), P.S.- Bisrakh, District-
G.B. Nagar, are hereby quashed- Habeas Corpus petition allowed. (Para 14, 16 & 19) (E-15)

Case Law Cited
Gautam Navlakha vs. National Investigation Agency (2022) 13 Supreme Court Cases 542; Priya Indoria vs.
State of Karnataka and others (2024) 4 SCC 749; Mihir Rajesh Shah vs. State of Maharashtra and another
(2025) SCC Online SC 2356; Anwar Dhebar vs. State of U.P. and 2 others in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.
12507 of 2024; Ajit Khan More vs. State of Maharashtra, through Inspector of Police of Wadgaon Nimbalkar
Police Station, 2025 SCC Online Bom 2899; Km. Rachna and another and State of U.P. and 4 others, in
Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 362 of 2020 ;Kanu Sanyal vs. District Magistrate, Darjeeling and others
(1974) 4 SCC 141

List of Acts
The Constitution of India, 1950; The Code of Criminal Procedure-1973; The Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023

List of Keywords
Arrest absolutely illegal; Against the requirements of the arrest memo prepared; Non-compliance of the
mandate under Section 50 CrPC; Sections 47& 48 BNS;

Case Arising From
Remand order dated 27.12.2025 passed by Civil Judge (S.D.) F.T.C./ A.C.J.M., Gautam Buddhanagar in in
Case Crime No. 750 of 2025 under Section 317(2) and 317(4), P.S.- Bisrakh, District- G.B. Nagar

Appearances for Parties
Counsel for Petitioners(s) : Raghav Dev Garg
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A

(Delivered by Hon'ble Siddharth, J.
&
Hon'ble Jai Krishna Upadhyay, J.)

1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of State is taken on record.
1174 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

2. Heard Sri Anand Kumar, Sri Aditya Giri, Sri Raghav Dev Garg, learned counsel for the
petitioners; Sri Kartikey Saran, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Ms. Manju
Thakur, learned A.G.A.-Ist for the State.

3. The above noted habeas corpus writ petition has been filed praying for following reliefs: -

"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the
respondents herein to produce and release the corpus / petitioner no. 1 from their illegal custody,
while declaring the arrest, detention and remand of the petitioner no. 1 as illegal, null and void for
not following the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mihir Rajesh vs. State of Maharashtra
and Another;

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the remand order
dated 27.12.2025 passed by Civil Judge (S.D.) F.T.C./ A.C.J.M., Gautam Buddhanagar.

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to initiate departmental
enquiry upon the actions of errant police officials of respondent no. 1.

(iv) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and
proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

(v) To award the cost of the petition."

4. The brief facts of the case are that on 28.11.2025 at about 05:40 p.m, the petitioner's father,
a permanent resident of Haldwani, Uttrakhand, was unlawfully abducted by Station House Officer,
Police Station- Bisrakh, District- Gautam Buddhanagar, from business premises of the petitioners
at Laxmi Nagar, Delhi. The petitioner's father was kept in illegal custody at Police Station- Bisrakh,
Gautam Buddh Nagar, U.P., for 5 days. During his illegal detention, evidence was fabricated and
F.I.R. No. 940 of 2025 was registered under Section 317(2) B.N.S against the father of petitioners
on 03.12.2025 and he was belatedly produced before learned Magistrate. The petitioner's father
filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court and out of vengeance, the police arrested petitioner
no. 1 without providing him any ground of arrest on 26.12.2025 from Haldwani, Uttrakhand. The
petitioner no. 1 was taken before remand Magistrate at District Court, Surajpur at Gautam
Buddhanagar on 27.12.2025 and no copy of arresting memo was provided to him. His counsel
moved an application for seeking his release on the aforesaid ground on the same day which was
rejected by the learned Magistrate on 27.12.2025. Hence, the petitioner has approached this court
challenging the order of illegal remand dated 27.12.2025 passed and illegal arrest memo.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is clear from the above facts of the
case that the police officials have acted in high handed manner and when it was pointed out to the
learned Magistrate, he has also not applied his judicial mind to the requirements of law before
affecting arrest of petitioner no. 1 and rejected the prayer of petitioner no. 1.

6. On the basis of counter affidavit filed by State the maintainability of the habeas corpus
petition has been questioned by learned Additional Advocate General on the ground that it is not
illegal arrest but arrest in accordance with law and the procedure of law has been followed in
making the arrest of petitioner no. 1. Petitioner no. 1 is in judicial custody and therefore, his
custody cannot be said to be illegal. It has been submitted that as per Annexure C.A.-5, which is the
arrest memo of the petitioner no. 1, full compliance of the requirements of a valid memo of arrest
1 All. Umang Rastogi & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1175
has been made while affecting the arrest of the petitioner no. 1. It has been argued that the habeas
corpus petition is devoid of merits and deserves to be dismissed. The petitioner no. 1 has criminal
history of six cases as per DCRB report and therefore, he does not deserves any latitude from this
court.

7. After considering the pleadings of the parties and the rival submissions, we find that the
crux of the dispute between the parties is that the petitioner no. 1 was arrested without disclosure of
grounds of arrest in the arrest memo brought on record as Annexure C.A.-5 with the counter
affidavit and it was also not supplied to the petitioner no. 1, though his signature was taken thereon.
It is being reproduced hereinbelow :-

चगरफ़्तारी मेमो
प्र॰ सू॰ रर॰ संख्या 750/2025 ददनांक 26.12.2025 र्ारा 317(2), 317(4) B.N.S.S
( थाना- त्रबसरि, िनपद- गौतम बुद्र् नगर )
( भारतीय नागररक सुरिा संदहता, 2023 की र्ारा 36 के अनुसार )
( माननीय सवोच्च न्यायालय के र्नदेशनुसार )

1.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त का नाम, उपनाम तथा उम्र
उमंग िॉक्टर पवनय रस्ट्तोगी
2.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त के माता / पपता / पर्त का नाम
पवनय रस्ट्तोगी
3.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त का मो॰ नं॰ / आर्ार सं॰

4.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त का वततमान पता
मकान नं॰ 11B गली नं॰2, थाना लक्ष्मी नगर
ददल्ली
5.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त का स्ट्थायी पता
उपरोक्त
6.
प्र ॰ सू ॰ रर॰ संख्या ......... र्ारांतगत
..........थाना- .........

7.
चगरफ़्तारी का स्ट्थान
शाजन्त ज्वेलसत लाल िाठ रोि , थाना - मुिानी,
नैनीताल
8.
चगरफ़्तारी की तारीि और समय
26/12/2025 16:40
9.
चगरफ़्तारी एवं रिे िाने के स्ट्थान के बारे में जिसे
भी सूचचत क्रकया है उसका नाम, पता, ईमेल आईिी
और फोन नंबर / सूचना का माध्यम (र्ारा 48(1)
BNSS)
पवनय रस्ट्तोगी
8279806914
10.
नोिल पुसलस अचर्कारी को सूचना देने का पववरण
(र्ारा 48(1) BNSS)

ACP दीिा ससंह - 8595902546
11.
चगरफ़्तारी करने वाले अचर्कारीयों का नाम, पद
और PNO संख्या
SI
942650602
1176 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
12.
चगरफ़्तारी का कारण
वांर्छत बरामदगी
A.
पुसलस अचर्कारी की उपजस्ट्तचथ में संज्ञेय अपरार्
काररत करने के कारण (र्ारा 35(1) BNSS)

B.
(i)
ऐसे व्यजक्त को कोई अग्रेतर अपरार् करने से
र्नवाररत करने के सलए

(ii)
अपरार् के उचचत अन्वेषण के सलए

(iii)
ऐसे व्यजक्त को अपरार् के क्रकसी साक्ष्य को
समटाने या ऐसे साक्ष्य में क्रकसी भी प्रकार का
छेडछाड र्नवाररत करने के सलए

(iv)
ऐसे व्यजक्त को मामले के तथ्यों से पररचचत
क्रकसी व्यजक्त को उत्प्रेररत करने, र्मकी देने से
र्नवारण करने के सलए ताक्रक उसे न्यायालय या
पुसलस अचर्कारी के समि ऐसे तथ्य को प्रकट
करने से रोका न िा सके ।

(v)
व्यजक्त िब ऐसा व्यजक्त चगरफ्तार नहीं क्रकया
िाता है तब उसकी उपजस्ट्तचथ न्यायालय में िब
कभी अपेक्षित हो सुर्नजश्चत नहीं की िा सकती है
।

13.

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

चगरफ़्तारी के आर्ार
चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त के बयान एवं साक्ष्यों
के साथ साथ वादी मुकदमा ददए गए साक्ष्यों के
आलोक में कैसे चगरफ़्तारी आवश्यक है ।

वह समस्ट्त सामग्री जिससे चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त की
अपरार् में संसलप्तता स्ट्पस्ट्ट है ।

वह समस्ट्त सामग्री / बरामदगी जिसके आर्ार पर
उक्त अपरार् में चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त की
चगरफ़्तारी की आवश्यकता है ।

पववेचनाचर्कारी द्वारा चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त
के सम्बन्र् में चगरफ़्तारी के समय तक एकत्र की
गयी समस्ट्त सामग्री जिससे चगरफ्तार करने की
आवश्यकता हुई ।

पववरण अंक्रकत करें
श्रीमान िी,
असभयुक्त उमंग रस्ट्तोगी s/o पवनय रस्ट्तोगी
सभवािी उपरोक्त को मुकदमा उपरोक्त के िुमत
व र्ारा से अवगत कराकर र्नयमों का पालन
करते हुए चगरफ्तार क्रकया गया है, असभयुक्त की
चगरफ़्तारी की सूचना उसके पपता पवनय रस्ट्तोगी
को दूरभाष के िररये दी गयी है तथा असभयुक्त
को उसके पवचर् पवशेषज्ञ वकील से समलने का
मौका देकर िमानती एवं िमानत के अचर्कारों
से अवगत कराया
1 All. Umang Rastogi & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1177

v.

vi.
अन्य ऐसी सामग्री दस्ट्तावेि साक्ष्य व इलेक्रॉर्नक
साक्ष्य आदद िो की चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त
से सम्बंचर्त है, का पववरण ।

चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त के सम्बन्र् में बी.
एन. एस. की क्रकन क्रकन र्ाराओं में सामग्री /
साक्ष्य है , िो की चगरफ़्तारी के सलए आवश्यक है
, का पववरण ।
14.
संज्ञेय व िमानती मामलों में चगरफ़्तारी पर
िमानत के अचर्कार से अवगत कराया गया या
नहीं (र्ारा 47(2) BNSS)

15.
शरीर पर कोई चोट अथवा असभघात आदद की
र्नशान

A.
चगरफ़्तारी के दौरान

B.
या अन्यथा

16.
यदद चगरफ्तार
व्यजक्त
को
उसके पवचर्क
अचर्कारों / उसका / उसकी पसंद के अचर्वक्ता
से समलने के बारे में बताया गया ? (र्ारा 38
BNSS)
हाुँ

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is clear from the above arrest memo that
it is not in accordance with the requirements of clause 13 of the arrest memo hence the arrest and
detention of petitioner no. 1 is illegal and therefore the habeas corpus writ petition filed by
petitioner no. 2 for seeking release of petitioner no. 1 from illegal custody is maintainable. He has
relied upon the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Gautam Navlakha vs. National
Investigation Agency (2022) 13 Supreme Court Cases 542 in support of his contention. He has
also made reliance on the judgments of the Apex Court in the cases of Priya Indoria vs. State of
Karnataka and others (2024) 4 SCC 749 and Mihir Rajesh Shah vs. State of Maharashtra and
another (2025) SCC Online SC 2356. Reliance on the judgment of this court in the case of Anwar
Dhebar vs. State of U.P. and 2 others in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 12507 of 2024 and
judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Ajit Khan More vs. State of Maharashtra,
through Inspector of Police of Wadgaon Nimbalkar Police Station, 2025 SCC Online Bom 2899,
has also been made.

9. Learned Additional Advocate General has relied upon the judgment of this court in the
cases of Km. Rachna and another and State of U.P. and 4 others, in Habeas Corpus Writ
Petition No. 362 of 2020 and Kanu Sanyal vs. District Magistrate, Darjeeling and others (1974) 4
SCC 141.
1178 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

10. After going through the authorities cited at Bar, we find that this court can entertain a
habeas corpus writ petition, if it is demonstrated before the court that the arrest of an accused has
been made without following the procedure established by law. The Apex Court in the case of
Mihir Rajesh Shah (Supra) has clearly held in paragraph 46 that to achieve the objective of Article
22(1) of the Constitution of India, the grounds of arrest must be informed to every person arrested.
In paragraph 49 it was held that the ground of arrest should be furnished to the arrestee in writing.
Breach of any such requirements will render the arrest of arrestee illegal.

11. We further find that earlier there was no definite proforma of memorandum of arrest in the
state of Uttar Pradesh and the investigating officer used to make his own memo of arrest and arrest
of accused was made on its basis. Finding total anarchy in this regard, this court passed number of
orders and thereafter the Director General of Police of State of U.P., got a proforma of arrest memo
prepared and the same was directed to be circulated to all the Police Commissioners of State / all
the Senior Superintendents of Police / Superintendents of Police of the State of U.P. Further all the
Additional Inspector Generals of Police in the State, Zonal Additional Inspector Generals of Police
and all the Police, Deputy Inspector Generals of Police of State of U.P were informed about the
new arrest memo by the Director General of Police of the State by his circular dated 25.07.2025
reproduced hereinbelow :-

" पवषय :- मा* उच्च न्यायालय, इलाहाबाद द्वारा क्रक्रसमनल समसलेर्नयस ररट पेदटशन
संख्या - 934 / 2025 मंिीत ससंह उफत इन्दर उफत मंिीत ससंह चन्ना बनाम उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य में
ददए गए र्नदेश के अनुपालन में "चगरफ़्तारी मेमो" तथा "व्यजक्तगत तलाशी मेमो " नए प्रारूप में
तैयार क्रकये िाने के सम्बन्र् में र्नदेश ।

पप्रय महोदय / महोदया,

क्रक्रसमनल समसलेर्नयस ररट पेदटशन संख्या - 934/ 2025 मंिीत ससंह बनाम उत्तर प्रदेश
राज्य व अन्य में माननीय उच्च न्यायालय इलाहाबाद द्वारा पाररत आदेश ददनांक्रकत 09.04.2025
(छायाप्रर्त संलनन) में माननीय उच्च न्यायालय द्वारा मु .अ. सं. 77/2024 उपरोक्त के असभयुक्त
मंिीत ससंह उफत इन्दर उफत मंिीत ससंह चन्ना की चगरफ़्तारी के दौरान दंि प्रक्रक्रया संदहता की र्ारा
50 तथा 50A / B.N.S.S., 2023 की र्ारा 47 तथा 48 का अनुपालन न क्रकये िाने पर अप्रसन्नता
व्यक्त की गयी तथा चगरफ़्तारी के दौरान हुयी इस प्रक्रक्रयात्मक त्रुदट को आर्ार बनाते हुए
असभयुजक्त को ररमांि पर ददए िाने के आदेश और चगरफ़्तारी को िाररि करते हुए र्नम्रवत आदेश
पाररत क्रकया गया है -

14. In the instant matter, admittedly, no such effort had been made by the learned Magistrate
to ensure adequate legal aid to the accused petitioner and appropriate opportunity of hearing at the
time judicial remand. Even the arrest memo does not contain any column regarding grounds of
arrest of the petitioner. This very issue is primarily the bone of contention between the parties in
the instant matter. Accordingly, 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,
1 All. Umang Rastogi & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1179
1950, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order in view of law laid down by the Apex Court
in Prabir Purkayastha (supra), Pankaj Bansal (supra) and Ashish Kakkar (supra).

15. In such view of the matter, the impugned order dated 26.12.2024 is hereby set aside. The
arrest of the petitioner is also quashed.

16. The petitioner shall be set at liberty, unless required in connection with any other case.

17. In light of the above, the writ petition is allowed.

18. Let the order be communicated to Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh through
Registrar General of this Court and accordingly, a circular be issued to all the Commissioners of
Police / SSPs/ Sps for necessary compliance of Section 50 and 50A (now Section 47 and 48
B.N.S.S) in the light of the observations made above.

2- दंि प्रक्रक्रया संदहता की र्ारा 50 तथा 50A/B.N.S.S., 2023 की र्ारा 47 तथा 48 में
यह व्यवस्ट्था है की चगरफ़्तारी के समय असभयुक्त को उसकी चगरफ़्तारी का कारण, उसके िमानत
प्राप्त करने के अचर्कार तथा चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त से र्नकट सम्बन्र्ी को सूचना देने की
आज्ञापक व्यवस्ट्था र्नम्रवत की गयी है -

47. Person arrested to be informed of grounds of arrest and of right to bail.

(1) Every police officer or other person arresting any person without warrant shall
forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested or other
grounds for such arrest.

(2) Where a police officer arrests without warrant any person other than a person accused
of a non-bailable offence, he shall inform the person arrested that he is entitled to be released on
bail and that he may arrange for sureties on his behalf.

48. Obligation of person making arrest to inform about arrest, etc., to relative or friend.

(1) Every police officer or other person making any arrest under this Sanhita shall
forthwith give the information regarding such arrest and place where the arrested person is being
held to any of his relatives, friends or such other persons as may be disclosed or nominated by the
arrested person for the purpose of giving such information and also to the designated police officer
in the district.

(2) The police officer shall inform the arrested person of his rights under sub-section (1)
as soon as he is brought to the police station.

(3) An entry of the fact as to who has been informed of the arrest of such person shall be
made in a book to be kept in the police station in such form as the State Government may, by rules,
provide.
1180 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

(4) It shall be the duty of the Magistrate before whom such arrested person is produced,
to satisfy himself that the requirements of sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) have been complied
with in respect of such arrested person.

3- सीसीटीएनएस सॉफ्टवेयर के अंतगत IIF-III फॉमत संख्या - 6 चगरफ़्तारी / न्यायालय
समपतण ज्ञापन (Arrest /Court Surrender Memo) का िेनरेट करने का पवकल्प उपलब्र् है क्रकन्तु
यह प्रपत्र असभयुक्त की चगरफ़्तारी के उपरांत समस्ट्त सूचनाएं अंक्रकत करने के बाद सीसीटीएनएस
द्वारा generate क्रकया िाता है । वततमान में असभयुक्त की चगरफ़्तारी के समय मौके पर पववेचकों
द्वारा अलग अलग प्रारूपों में चगरफ़्तारी मेमो तैयार क्रकये िाते हैं, जिसमे चगरफ़्तारी के समय
अर्नवायत रूप से पालन क्रकये िाने वाले प्रापवर्ानों के सम्बन्र् में की गयी कायतवाही का पववरण
अंक्रकत करने हेतु कोई त्रबंदु र्नर्ातररत नहीं है । वततमान प्रकरण में असभयुक्त की चगरफ़्तारी के
दौरान िो चगरफ़्तारी मेमो तैयार क्रकया गया उसमे असभयुक्त को उसकी चगरफ़्तारी का कारण
बताये िाने का कोई त्रबंदु र्नर्ातररत नहीं था, जिसे प्रक्रक्रयात्मक त्रुदट मानते हुए माननीय उच्च
न्यायालय द्वारा असभयुक्त की चगरफ़्तारी को अवैर् पाया गया और उसे र्नरस्ट्त कर ददया गया ।

4- माननीय उच्च न्यायालय द्वारा पाररत आदेश के क्रम में असभयुक्त की चगरफ़्तारी के
समय तैयार क्रकये िाने वाले चगरफ़्तारी मेमो में अंक्रकत क्रकये िाने वाली सूचनाओं के सम्बन्र् में
अध्ययन कर ररपोटत प्रस्ट्तुत करने हेतु अर्ोहस्ट्तािरी द्वारा एक ससमर्त का गठन क्रकया गया ।
ससमर्त द्वारा चगरफ़्तारी मेमो में अंक्रकत की िाने वाली सूचनाओं के सम्बन्र् में पवचर्क जस्ट्थर्त
तथा माननीय सवोच्च न्यायालय द्वारा क्रक्रसमनल अपील संख्या - 3051-3052/2023 पंकि बंसल
बनाम भारत संघ व अन्य, िायरी नंबर 42896/2023 प्रबीर पुस्ट्तकालय बनाम ऍन. सी . टी
ददल्ली , क्रक्रसमनल अपील संख्या - 621/2025 पवहान कुमार बनाम हररयाणा राज्य तथा क्रक्रसमनल
अपील संख्या - 1518/2025 आशीष कक्कड बनाम यू.टी. ऑफ चंिीगढ़ में पवसभन्न र्तचथयों पर
पाररत र्नणतयों का अध्ययन क्रकया गया तथा इन र्नणतयों के आलोक में सी.बी.आई तथा प्रवततन
र्नदेशालय द्वारा संशोचर्त क्रकये गए चगरफ्तारी मेमो का अध्ययन क्रकया गया । ससमर्त द्वारा
अपनी ररपोटत के साथ असभयुक्त की चगरफ्तारी के समय तैयार क्रकये िाने वाले चगरफ्तारी मेमो
तथा व्यजक्तगत तलाशी मेमो का आलेि तैयार कर उपलब्र् कराया गया है ।

5- क्रकसी भी व्यजक्त को चगरफ़्तार करने से व्यजक्तगत स्ट्वतंत्रता का संवैर्ार्नक अचर्कार
प्रभापवत होता है संवैर्ार्नक व्यवस्ट्था के अनुसार क्रकसी भी व्यजक्त के संवैर्ार्नक अचर्कारों का
हनन कानून द्वारा स्ट्थापपत प्रक्रक्रया पूरी क्रकए त्रबना नहीं क्रकया िा सकता ऐसी दशा में चगरफ़्तारी
के संबंर् में दंि प्रक्रक्रया संदहता की र्ारा 50 तथा 50A/ BNSS, 2023 की र्ारा 47 तथा 48 का
अनुपालन अर्नवायत है ।

6- BNSS, 2023 की र्ारा- 37 के क्रम में अचर्सूचचत र्नयमावली 2024 के र्नयम 6 के
अंतगत उपर्नरीिक या उससे उच्च पद के अचर्कारी को जिला कडरोल रूम व थानों पर चगरफ़्तार
1 All. Umang Rastogi & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1181
व्यजक्तयों के नाम व पते की सूचना रिने का दार्यत्व ददया गया है, जिसके अनुपालन में प्रत्येक
थाने तथा प्रत्येक िनपद / कसमश्नरेट में इस हेतु सिम स्ट्तर के अचर्कारी की र्नयुजक्त क्रकया
िाना सुर्नजश्चत क्रकया िाए । नासमत अचर्कारी चगरफ़्तार व्यजक्तयों के नाम व पते की सूचना
रिने के सलए जज़म्मेदार होंगे तथा संकसलत सूचना जिला कडरोल रूम पर प्रदसशत की िायेगी ।
चगरफ़्तारी मेमो तैयार करते समय चगरफ़्तारी की सूचना नासमत अचर्कारी को ददए िाने के
सम्बन्र् में एक सूचना कॉलम बनाया गया है, जिसे असभयुक्त की चगरफ़्तारी के समय अर्नवायत
रूप में भरा िाना आवश्यक है ।

7- असभयुक्तों की चगरफ़्तारी के समय तैयार क्रकए िाने वाले चगरफ़्तारी मेमो तथा
व्यजक्तगत तलाशी मेमो का प्रारूप पररपत्र के साथ संलनन कर इस र्नदेश के साथ प्रेपषत क्रकया
िाता है क्रक क्रकसी भी व्यजक्त को चगरफ़्तार करते समय पररपत्र के साथ संलनन प्रारूप में
चगरफ़्तारी मेमो तथा व्यजक्तगत तलाशी मेमों तैयार क्रकया िाए तथा चगरफ़्तारी र्नयमों में अंक्रकत
सभी प्रावर्ानों का अिरश अनुपालन करते हुए चगरफ़्तारी र्नयमों तथा व्यजक्तगत तलाशी र्नयमों
में भरी िाने वाली सभी सूचनाओं को यथास्ट्थान एवं त्रुदट रदहत रूप से अंक्रकत क्रकया िाए । यदद
असभयुक्त की चगरफ़्तारी के समय कोई आपपत्तिनक यह अवैर् सामग्री बरामद होती है जिसके
सलए पवस्ट्तृत फदत बरामदगी तैयार क्रकए िाने की आवश्यकता हो तो ऐसी दशा में व्यजक्तगत
तलाशी मेमो तैयार क्रकया िाना अर्नवायत नहीं होगा बजल्क असभयुक्त के पास से बरामद सभी
वस्ट्तुओं का उल्लेि फदत बरामदगी में ही क्रकया िाएगा ।

अतः आप सभी को र्नदेसशत क्रकया िाता है की इस पररपत्र के माध्यम से ददए गए
र्नदेशों से समस्ट्त पववेचकों तथा पयतवेिण अचर्कारीयों को अवगत कराते हुए "चगरफ़्तारी मेमो "
तथा "व्यजक्तगत तलाशी मेमो " का प्रारूप सवतसंबजन्र्त को उपलब्र् करा दे तथा इन र्नदेशों का
कडाई से अनुपालन कराना सुर्नजश्चत कराएं ।

चगरफ़्तारी मेमो
प्र ॰ सू ॰ रर॰ संख्या .......... ददनांक .............. र्ारा ................
( थाना- ........., िनपद- .............. )
(भारतीय नागररक सुरिा संदहता, 2023 की र्ारा 36 के अनुसार)
(माननीय सवोच्च न्यायालय के र्नदेशनुसार)

1.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त का नाम, उपनाम तथा उम्र

2.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त के माता / पपता / पर्त का नाम

3.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त का मो॰ नं॰ / आर्ार सं॰
1182 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
4.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त का वततमान पता

5.
चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त का स्ट्थायी पता

6.
प्र ॰ सू ॰ रर॰ संख्या ......... र्ारांतगत
.................थाना- ................

7.
चगरफ़्तारी का स्ट्थान

8.
चगरफ़्तारी की तारीि और समय

9.
चगरफ़्तारी एवं रिे िाने के स्ट्थान के बारे में जिसे
भी सूचचत क्रकया है उसका नाम, पता, ईमेल आईिी
और फोन नंबर / सूचना का माध्यम (र्ारा 48(1)
BNSS)

10.
नोिल पुसलस अचर्कारी को सूचना देने का पववरण
(र्ारा 48(1) BNSS)

11.
चगरफ़्तारी करने वाले अचर्कारीयों का नाम, पद और
PNO संख्या

12.
चगरफ़्तारी का कारण

A.
पुसलस अचर्कारी की उपजस्ट्तचथ में संज्ञेय अपरार्
काररत करने के कारण (र्ारा 35(1) BNSS)

B. (i)
ऐसे व्यजक्त को कोई अग्रेतर अपरार् करने से
र्नवाररत करने के सलए

(ii)
अपरार् के उचचत अन्वेषण के सलए

(iii)
ऐसे व्यजक्त को अपरार् के क्रकसी साक्ष्य को समटाने
या ऐसे साक्ष्य में क्रकसी भी प्रकार का छेडछाड
र्नवाररत करने के सलए

(iv)
ऐसे व्यजक्त को मामले के तथ्यों से पररचचत क्रकसी
व्यजक्त को उत्प्रेररत करने, र्मकी देने से र्नवारण
करने के सलए ताक्रक उसे न्यायालय या पुसलस
अचर्कारी के समि ऐसे तथ्य को प्रकट करने से
रोका न िा सके ।

(v)
व्यजक्त िब ऐसा व्यजक्त चगरफ्तार नहीं क्रकया िाता
है तब उसकी उपजस्ट्तचथ न्यायालय में िब कभी
अपेक्षित हो सुर्नजश्चत नहीं की िा सकती है ।
1 All. Umang Rastogi & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1183
13.

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

v.

vi.

चगरफ़्तारी के आर्ार

चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त के बयान एवं साक्ष्यों के
साथ साथ वादी मुकदमा ददए गए साक्ष्यों के आलोक
में कैसे चगरफ़्तारी आवश्यक है ।

वह समस्ट्त सामग्री जिससे चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त की
अपरार् में संसलप्तता स्ट्पस्ट्ट है ।

वह समस्ट्त सामग्री / बरामदगी जिसके आर्ार पर
उक्त अपरार् में चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त की
चगरफ़्तारी की आवश्यकता है ।

पववेचनाचर्कारी द्वारा चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त के
सम्बन्र् में चगरफ़्तारी के समय तक एकत्र की गयी
समस्ट्त
सामग्री
जिससे
चगरफ्तार
करने
की
आवश्यकता हुई ।

अन्य ऐसी सामग्री दस्ट्तावेि साक्ष्य व इलेक्रॉर्नक
साक्ष्य आदद िो की चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त से
सम्बंचर्त है, का पववरण ।

चगरफ्तार क्रकये गए व्यजक्त के सम्बन्र् में बी. एन.
एस. की क्रकन क्रकन र्ाराओं में सामग्री / साक्ष्य है ,
िो की चगरफ़्तारी के सलए आवश्यक है , का पववरण
।
पववरण अंक्रकत करें
14.
संज्ञेय व िमानती मामलों में चगरफ़्तारी पर िमानत
के अचर्कार से अवगत कराया गया या नहीं (र्ारा
47(2) BNSS)

15.
शरीर पर कोई चोट अथवा असभघात आदद की
र्नशान

A.
चगरफ़्तारी के दौरान

B.
या अन्यथा
1184 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
16.
यदद चगरफ्तार व्यजक्त को उसके पवचर्क अचर्कारों /
उसका / उसकी पसंद के अचर्वक्ता से समलने के बारे
में बताया गया ? (र्ारा 38 BNSS)

Arrest Memo
(Case F.I.R ________ Dated _______ U/S __________)
(Police Station ___________ District _________)
(As per Section 36 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023)
(As per direction of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India)

1.
Name with Alias and Age of Arrestee.

2.
Name of Mother / Father / Husband of Arrestee

3.
Mobile No. / Adhar No. of Arrestee

4.
Present Address of the Arrestee

5.
Permanent Address of the Arrestee

6.
F.I.R No. ________ Sec. of Law _______ Police
Station ___________

7.
Place of Arrest

8.
Date and Time of Arrest

9.
Name, address, email ID and phone number / mode
of intimation of person to whom information has
been given about arrest and place of detention
(Section 48(1) B.N.S.S)

10.
Details of information given to the Nodal Police
Officer (Section 48(1) B.N.S.S)

11.
Name, Rank & PNO No. of the officers making
arrest.

12.
Reasons for Arrest

A.
For committing a cognizable offence in the
presence of a police officer (Section 35(1)(a)
B.N.S.S)

B(i)
To prevent such person from committing any
further offence

(ii)
For the proper investigation of offence

(iii)
To prevent such person from eliminating any
witness of the offence or from tampering such
witness in any manner.

(iv)
To prevent such person from inducing, threatening
or promising any person acquainted with the fact of
the case so as to prevent him from disclosing such
fact before the court or police officer.

(v)
Because when such a person is not arrested then his
presence in the court whenever required cannot be
1 All. Umang Rastogi & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1185
ensured.

Ground of Arrest

(i)
How is arrest necessary in the light of the statement
of the arrested person and evidence as well as
statement given by informant.

(ii)
All the material from which the involvement of
arrested person in the crime in clear.

(iii)
All the material on the basis of which the arrest of
the person charged with the said offence is
required.

(iv)
All material collected by the investigating officer
till the time of arrest in respect of the person
arrested which necessitated the arrested.

(v)
Details of the other material collected as
documentary evidence, electronic evidence, etc.,
relating to the person arrested.

(vi)
Details of Sections of B.N.S.S and other Laws
where evidence / material is available against the
person arrested which is required for arrest.

14.
In cognizable and bailable offences, was he
informed about the right to bail ? (Section 47(2)
B.N.S.S.

15.
Whether any visible signs of trauma / injury present
on the body of the arrestee? (Section 38 B.N.S.S)

A.
During Arrest

B.
Other

16
Whether the arrested person has been informed
about his / her legal rights / opportunity to meet a
lawyer of his / her choice? (Section 38 B.N.S.S)

The accused was thoroughly informed about the reasons and grounds of arrest and his
legal rights in the language understandable to him and the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
and the provisions of the B.N.S.S were followed during the arrest.

Signature of the Arresting Officer
Name and Rank ____________
P.S. _____________
Dated __________
Received a Copy

Signature / Thumb Impression of
Arrestee
Signature / Thumb Impression of Relative / Friend /
Nominated Person
1186 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Name & Signature of Witnesses

S.I. No.
Name, Mobile No. and Complete Address of Witness
Signature
Witness 1

Witness 2

 "
_____________________

12. After comparing the memo of arrest of this case quoted hereinabove Annexure CA-V (in
vernacular), with the new memo of arrest forming part of the circular dated 25.07.2025 of the
Director General of Police, U.P., also quoted hereinabove, we find that both the memo of arrest are
the same but the requirements of giving the details of the grounds of arrest, as required under
clause 13(1) to (vi) of the memo, have not been complied by the Sub-Inspector of Police of
respondent no. 3 in Annexure C.A.-V. Therefore, we are constrained to observe that despite clearly
indicating the requirements of the ground of arrest, by the Director General of Police of the State,
his own Subordinate Officer of Police is not complying the same and therefore the purpose of new
arrest memo having been made and circulated to all the police officers of the State has been
frustrated.

13. A bare perusal of the memo of arrest shows that the grounds of arrest mentioned in
paragraph 13 have been sub-divided in six sub-clauses. In the present case, requirement of not a
single clause has been fulfilled by the investigating officer of the police. He has only stated that the
accused has been acquainted of the offence committed by him and the sections wherein he has been
implicated, after following the procedure of arrest and information of his arrest has been given to
his father, Vinay Rastogi, on telephone. He has also been informed that he can meet his counsel
and he has been acquainted of his rights to obtain bail.

14. We find that the requirements of clause 13 and its sub-clauses in the memo of arrest have
not been complied. None of the sub-clause of Section 13 provides that an accused should only be
informed about the offence committed by him and section of his implication, but the clause
aforesaid requires that accused is required to be informed about all the material from which his
involvement in the crime is clear and bring material on record on the basis of which the arrest of
the person charged with the said offence is required. No details of the material collected by the
investigating officer, till the time of arrest of petitioner no. 1, which necessitated his arrest was
disclosed. Details of other material collected, documentary or electronic, relating to person arrested
was also not disclosed. Even the details of sections of B.N.S.S and other laws, their supporting
material and evidence collected against the arrested accused were not disclosed in the arrest memo.
Therefore, it is clear that the arrest of the petitioner no. 1 was absolutely illegal and against the
requirements of the arrest memo prepared by respondents themselves. The purpose of preparing the
arrest memo was frustrated by the Sub-Inspector of Police of respondent no. 3.

15. It is high time that the police officials, who are not complying the requirements of the
arrest memo and violating the constitutional mandate provided under Article 22(1) of the
constitution of India and further violating Section 50 and 50A Cr.P.C / 47, 48 and B.N.S.S should
be sternly dealt with. The violation of the constitutional mandate, provision of Cr.P.C/ B.N.S.S and
1 All. Lko. Development Authority Vs. Sushma Shukla
1187
the direction of the Director General of Police of the State of U.P dated 25.07.2025 clearly amounts
to dereliction of duty on the part of the police personnel investigating this case. The empty
compliance of law and justification of the same before the court, as in this case by the respondents,
deserves to be discouraged.

16. It is hereby directed that the violation of the aforesaid legal provisions by any police
officer, while affecting arrest an accused, by not disclosing the grounds of arrest as per clause 13 of
the memo of arrest, would amount to the misconduct of dereliction of duty by police official
concerned and he shall be liable for being proceeded departmentally, after being placed under
suspension, so that he may not perpetrate this illegality any more

17. Let this order by communicated to the Director General of Police, U.P., within period of
one week by the Registrar (Compliance) of this court for necessary compliance.

18. The impugned remand order and order dated 27.12.2025 passed by Civil Judge (Senior
Division), F.T.C. / Gautam Buddanagar in Case Crime No. 750 of 2025 under Section 317(2) and
317(4), P.S.- Bisrakh, District- G.B. Nagar, are hereby quashed.

19. The petitioner no. 1 is directed to be set free forthwith.

20. It shall be open for the respondents to proceed against the petitioner no. 1 strictly in
accordance with law.

21. The habeas corpus writ petition is allowed.

22. This order shall be complied by the concerned Magistrate, if a copy of this order certified
by the counsel for the petitioner no. 1, downloaded from the official website of this Court is
produced before him, till certified copy of this order is issued.
----------
(2026) 1 ILRA 1187
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 21.01.2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J.

RERA Appeal Defective No. 125 of 2026

Lko. Development Authority ...Appellant
Versus
Sushma Shukla ...Respondent

Issue for Consideration
(A) Whether a private contract/settlement can override the provisions of the statute? and/or,
(B) Whether agreement, which has been signed on the dotted line can be held to be valid?