Accused Can't Complain Family Wasn't Informed Of Arrest After Choosing To Inform Counsel Instead: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently rejected a bail applicant's contention that his arrest was illegal because his family members were not informed, observing that it is for the accused himself to indicate the person whom he wishes to be informed about his arrest.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma noted that the applicant had chosen to inform his counsel, which was complied with by the investigating officer, and such he cannot now allege non-compliance.

The Court thus dismissed the bail plea filed by a man accused of sexually abusing his minor daughter in a case registered under Sections 376, 354 and 506 IPC, Section 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 6 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

The accused had argued before the Court that he was arrested without being furnished proper written grounds of arrest as mandated under Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 47 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). He also contended that his family members had not been informed about his arrest.

Rejecting the contention, the Court held that there was prima facie compliance with the statutory safeguards governing arrest procedure. It noted that the trial court had rightly observed that the accused himself must indicate the person he wishes to inform regarding his arrest.

“In the present case, the applicant is stated to have opted to inform his counsel, which appears to have been duly complied with by the I.O., and there is no material to show any delay in this regard,” the Court observed.

It also took note of the fact that the accused's counsel was present when he was produced for judicial remand and that the trial court had recorded that the accused acknowledged having been informed of the grounds of arrest and having received a copy thereof.

Accordingly, it held that there was no material to show violation of Section 47 BNSS or Article 22(1) of the Constitution.

On merits, the Court refused to grant bail to the accused, noting the serious allegations levelled by the minor victim, including repeated acts of sexual abuse allegedly committed by her biological father over several years.

Appearance: Mr. Monesh Kumar Sharma & Mr. Vikrant Dabas, Advocates for Petitioner; Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar, APP for the State. Ms. Sanya Kumar, Mr. Harsh Jain, Mr. Chiranjeev Singh, Advocates for the victim.

Case title: Vishwas Patil v. State

Case no.: BAIL APPLN. 1010/2026

Click here to read order