In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court extended the Pankaj Bansal judgment to apply to cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. This means that any person arrested under UAPA or any other offence has a statutory right to be informed about the grounds of arrest in writing. The Court emphasized that this right is essential for the arrested person to consult their legal counsel and seek appropriate legal remedies. This ruling reaffirms the sanctity of the fundamental right to be informed of the grounds of arrest, as guaranteed by the Constitution of India.
Landmark SC Ruling: Expanding the Right to Know Arrest Grounds under UAPA
In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has extended the Pankaj Bansal judgment to apply to cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). This ruling strengthens the fundamental right of arrested individuals to be informed about the reasons for their detention.
Background
The UAPA, enacted in 1967, is a stringent anti-terrorism law that authorizes the authorities to arrest and detain individuals suspected of involvement in terrorist activities. However, concerns have been raised about the abuse of this law and the lack of due process protections for those arrested.
The Pankaj Bansal judgment, delivered in 2018, held that it is a fundamental right of every arrested person under Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution to be promptly informed about the grounds of their arrest. This right includes providing a copy of the arrest memo or other documents that contain the reasons for the detention.
Supreme Court Ruling
The recent Supreme Court ruling extends the Pankaj Bansal judgment to cases under UAPA. This means that any person arrested under UAPA now has a statutory right to be informed about the grounds of their arrest in writing.
The Court emphasized that this right is essential for the arrested person to consult their legal counsel and seek appropriate legal remedies. It also noted that the lack of clarity about the reasons for arrest can lead to prolonged detention and psychological harm to the accused.
Top 5 FAQs and Answers
1. What is the significance of the Supreme Court ruling?
It strengthens the fundamental right of arrested individuals under UAPA to be informed about the grounds of their arrest, ensuring due process and legal recourse.
2. How does the ruling impact arrests under UAPA?
It mandates the authorities to provide a written statement of the grounds of arrest to the accused, facilitating legal representation and access to remedies.
3. What is the legal basis for this right?
The right to be informed of the grounds of arrest is enshrined in Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the protection of personal liberty.
4. What happens if the authorities fail to provide the grounds of arrest?
The accused may file a writ petition in the High Court or Supreme Court challenging the legality of their detention.
5. What are the potential implications of the ruling?
It could lead to a decrease in arbitrary arrests and detentions under UAPA, as well as improved legal protection for accused individuals.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court ruling on UAPA is a major step forward in protecting the fundamental rights of arrested individuals. By extending the Pankaj Bansal judgment, the Court has ensured that anyone arrested under UAPA has a statutory right to know why they are being detained. This ruling will have significant implications for future cases and will help prevent the misuse of the Act.
After deciding to vacate the Budgam Assembly seat, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has officially announced that he will be representing the Ganderbal constituency. He expressed his gratitude towards the people of Budgam and promised to continue working for them over the next five years. This move marks the end of the six-year period when J&K didn't have an Assembly and the NC, with support from other parties, will continue to hold the majority in the 95-member Assembly.
After 26 days of fasting, activist Sonam Wangchuk and his supporters have finally ended their protest after receiving assurance from the Ministry of Home Affairs regarding talks on Ladakh's demands. The protest was organized by Wangchuk and others to demand Sixth Schedule status for Ladakh, which aims to protect its cultural and environmental heritage. The Ministry has assured that the high-powered committee, which was holding talks with representatives from Ladakh, will resume discussions on December 3.
Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, the 50th Chief Justice of India, is known for his progressive judgements and unwavering commitment to upholding the Constitution. With a legacy inherited from his father, the longest-serving CJI, Justice Chandrachud has become one of the most influential and respected judges in the Supreme Court. Notably, his lead judgement in the historic right to privacy case and his stance against the criminalisation of same-sex relations under Section 377 have solidified his reputation as a champion of individual rights and liberties.
Union Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy has expressed his confidence in becoming the Chief Minister of Karnataka again before 2028. He highlighted his previous 14-month stint as CM, promising to use his experience to deliver good governance if he gets a full five-year term. Kumaraswamy also criticized the current Congress government, urging the people to give him a chance to implement his plans for the state's prosperity.
Supreme Court Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud shared his experiences working on the controversial Ayodhya-Babri Masjid dispute case, stating that it was a difficult case to adjudicate. He revealed that he even prayed to God to help find a solution. This statement was made during his address to a gathering in a village in Khed taluka. Soon after, the 5-judge bench, led by Justice Chandrachud, delivered the verdict in November 2019, allowing the construction of a Ram Temple on the disputed site. The judge also mentioned that regular prayers and faith can lead to finding a solution in challenging cases.
The Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, accused US President Joe Biden of using nuclear arms talks as a ploy to gain electoral points for Democratic Party candidate Kamala Harris. Lavrov also revealed that Moscow is against engaging in strategic stability talks without preconditions, as urged by the US, in order to prevent any unilateral military advantages. This comes ahead of the upcoming US presidential elections on November 5, in which Harris was selected as the Democratic nominee after Biden's withdrawal following a controversial televised debate with Republican nominee Donald Trump.
In a recent case at the Kerala High Court, an FIR against a university director accused of sexually harassing a female student during a youth festival was quashed. The court held that the physical contact that occurred was not sexual in nature, but rather part of a resistance effort to maintain discipline. The petitioner argued that the FIR was filed with malicious intent due to a delay in filing and strict event guidelines implemented by the university. The court cautioned the petitioner against any retaliatory measures that may hinder the complainant's studies.
Police sources have revealed that the Delhi Police is investigating a possible Khalistani link in the blast near a CRPF school in Rohini on Monday. This comes as a response to a group claiming responsibility for the explosion, as the police have sought details from messaging app Telegram. The blast caused damage to property but no injuries were reported, with an FIR mentioning the discovery of a "white powder" and CCTV footage of a suspect being recovered.
The 65th state-level Police Commemoration Day was observed in Chandigarh, where Director General of Police (DGP) Punjab Gaurav Yadav paid homage to the bravehearts who sacrificed their lives for the sake of the nation. Addressing the gathering, DGP Yadav highlighted the bravery and courage of the Punjab Police, and their efforts in maintaining peace and rooting out militancy. He also discussed the measures being taken to combat street crime and drug sales, and assured support to the families of martyrs.
The Supreme Court has put a hold on the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights' directive to discontinue funding for Madrasa Boards, following a plea filed by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind. The plea argued that the NCPCR's action was discriminatory and unconstitutional, and violated several fundamental rights. The Commission, which is responsible for protecting children's rights across India, had recommended that non-Muslim children enrolled in madrasas be moved to mainstream schools under the RTE Act of 2009.