Man Booked For Sharing Sensitive Military Info With Pakistan Gets Bail From Rajasthan High Court Over Non-Supply Of Grounds Of Arrest

The Rajasthan High Court has granted bail to a man booked over 'grave allegations' of transmitting strategic and sensitive information about military establishments to Pakistani handlers, considering that the investigating agencies failed to fulfill the mandatory requirement of communicating the grounds of arrest in writing.

Stating that it was 'left with no other option' than to grant bail despite such grave allegations, bench of Justice Praveer Bhatnagar emphasized that strict adherence to the constitutional and statutory safeguards assumes even greater significance in cases involving potential serious ramifications on national security and sovereignty of the nation.

The Court further opined that the duty to ensure compliance with constitutional and statutory safeguards governing arrest, was not only upon the investigating officer effecting the arrest, but also upon the prosecuting agency and the Magistrate supervising the remand proceedings.

It thus directed initiation of appropriate action against the three officers for the lapses.

For context, the Court was hearing bail application by the accused who was charged under the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and the BNS, 2023, with the abovementioned allegations.

It was argued by the accused that the mandatory procedural safeguards were not followed, and prior to effecting his arrest, the grounds of arrest were not furnished or effectively communicated to him.

On the contrary, the Public Prosecutor submitted that the accused was made aware of the ground of arrest through arrest memo. Further, no such objection was raised by him at the earliest available stage, at the time of remand proceedings or immediately after arrest.

After hearing the contentions, the Court observed that the constitutional safeguard of communicating grounds of arrest, emanated from Article 21 of the Constitution, and was also statutorily incorporated under Section 47, BNS.

It was held that under this provision, there was a mandatory obligation on the police officer or the one effecting the arrest, to communicate the grounds of arrest to the accused.

The Court referred to the Supreme Court case of Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra (2025), to hold that, “grounds of arrest are required to be communicated in writing in a language understood by the arrestee and non-supply thereof prior to or immediately after arrest would not vitiate the arrest provided such grounds are furnished within a reasonable time and before the remand proceedings before the Magistrate.”

Hence, the Court stated that failure to fulfil the mandatory obligation shall result in the accused being released on bail.

In this background, the Court highlighted that as per the records, the groundss of arrest were even though informed to the accused (as per the case diary), these were not furnished to him in writing. This was contrary to the settled position of law.

The Court further highlighted that before the Magistrate when the police sought remand, no objection was raised by the petitioner. However, at the same time, neither the Public Prosecutor, nor the Magistrate verified, whether the mandatory requirement was duly complied with or not. The Court opined,

“The constitutional and statutory safeguards governing arrest cast a corresponding duty not only upon the investigating officer effecting the arrest, but also upon the prosecuting agency and the Magistrate supervising the remand proceedings to ensure strict adherence to the mandate flowing from Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India and Section 47 of the BNSS, as mere disclosure or narration of allegations, without furnishing written grounds of arrest to the accused, would not amount to due compliance of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mihir Rajesh Shah (Supra).”

The Court held that the gravity of allegations and potential ramifications on the national security and sovereignty of nation, were all the more reasons for a strict adherence to the constitutional and statutory mandates.

Accordingly, while opining that it was left with no other option, the Court concluded that continued detention of the accused was not sustainable in law.

Hence, the bail application was allowed, releasing the accused on bail

While parting, the Court held that the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra (2025), regarding grounds of arrest to be furnished in writing to the accused, had to be mandatorily complied with by all the investigating agencies and the Court while dealing with the remand proceedings.

“It is further directed that at the time of considering any remand application, the concerned Magistrate shall specifically ascertain and satisfy as to whether the grounds of arrest have been duly furnished and communicated to the accused in accordance with law.”

The Court directed the order's copy to be sent to DGP, Rajasthan, and Director of Prosecution, Rajasthan, for initiating appropriate action against the concerned investigating officer and Public prosecutor for the lapses.

The Registry has also been directed to place a copy of this order before the Chief Justice for appropriate action in relation to the proceedings conducted by the concerned Magistrate.

Title: Jhabra Ram v State of Rajasthan

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 193

Click Here To Read/Download Order