The Allahabad High Court has held that the arrest of an accused who is already in custody in another case is a fresh arrest, so the grounds of that arrest must be communicated to him under Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 48(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Lucknow: The Allahabad High Court has rejected the State’s contention that the second arrest of an accused who is already in custody in an earlier case is a mere change of custody, holding that it amounts to a fresh arrest that attracts the safeguards of Article 22(1), though it dismissed the petition on the facts [Moti Ram Jaat @ Moti Ram Jaat Fauji v. State of U.P. & Anr.].
The petition was decided by Justice Manish Mathur. The accused is facing allegations that are untested, the High Court has expressed no view on their merits, and the presumption of innocence applies.
Background
The petitioner was in custody under an earlier FIR when the Anti-Terrorist Squad produced him on a production warrant and arrested him in a second case, registered under Sections 148, 152 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He challenged the second arrest and the consequent remand order.
Contentions
The petitioner contended that the grounds of the second arrest were not communicated to him or to his family members, that this violated Article 22(1), and that the remand order was therefore invalid.
The State contended that since the petitioner was already in custody, the second arrest was only a change of custody and not a fresh arrest, so that no compliance with Article 22(1) was required.
What the High Court held
The Court rejected the State’s contention and held that the second arrest of a person in custody is a fresh arrest that must comply with Article 22(1) and Section 48(2) of the BNSS.
Second arrest while in custody would amount to a fresh arrest.
Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana, the Court noted that the grounds of arrest must be communicated in a manner that effectively conveys sufficient knowledge of the basic facts, and in a language understood by the arrested person.
Why the Allahabad High Court petition failed despite the fresh arrest finding
The petition was nevertheless dismissed on procedural grounds, as the trial had advanced beyond the stage at which the initial remand could be challenged. The Court reaffirmed that non-compliance with the safeguards of Article 22(1) vitiates the arrest but does not invalidate the subsequent investigation or trial.
Case Title: Moti Ram Jaat @ Moti Ram Jaat Fauji v. State of U.P. through Additional Chief Secretary, Principal Secretary, Home, Lucknow & Anr.
Bench: Justice Manish Mathur, Allahabad High Court
Date of Order: October 5, 2026