Yogesh Chand Aggarwal vs. Central Bureau Of Investigation Cbi

Held

The Court held that the applicant's second bail application was liable to be rejected. The primary issue revolved around the compliance with Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and Section 50 of the CrPC regarding the communication of grounds of arrest. The Court noted the evolution of legal interpretation on this matter, referencing Supreme Court judgments such as *Pankaj Bansal* and *Prabir Purkayastha* which emphasized written communication, and *Vihaan Kumar* which allowed for other modes if the objective was met. The Court found that the arrest memo, provided to the applicant at the time of arrest, contained the 'Reasons for arrest in brief', which detailed the demand and acceptance of a bribe of Rs. 10,000/- from the complainant, punishable under Section 7 of the PC Act. The Court concluded that this information, stated under the heading 'Reasons for arrest in brief', constituted the basic facts constituting the offence and was akin to the charge that might be framed. Therefore, the Court held that the grounds of arrest were communicated in writing to the applicant through the arrest memo, which was sufficient compliance with Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. Consequently, there was no violation of the applicant's fundamental rights, and the bail application was rejected.

Facts

The applicant, Yogesh Chand Aggarwal, a Superintendent in the Central Goods and Services Tax office, was arrested by the CBI for allegedly demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs. 15,000/- to reactivate a suspended GSTIN. The informant reported the demand to the CBI, leading to a trap operation where the applicant was apprehended with the bribe money. His hand wash tested positive. This is his second bail application. The first bail application was rejected on merits. The current application is based on the alleged violation of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, specifically that the grounds of arrest were not communicated in writing to the applicant at the time of his arrest.

Key Issues

1. Whether the communication of the grounds of arrest to the applicant was in compliance with Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, particularly considering the requirement for written communication as interpreted in subsequent Supreme Court judgments. Petitioner's Arguments: - The applicant's counsel argued that Article 22(1) mandates that grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing. Merely providing documents containing reasons for arrest is insufficient compliance. - They contended that the 'reason for arrest' is distinct from the 'grounds of arrest'. - They also raised issues regarding the non-provision of pre-trap memo, post-trap memo, remand application, and first remand order. - Reliance was placed on judgments like *Icchu Devi Choraria v. Union of India*, *Lallubhai Jogibhai Patel v. Union of India*, *Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India*, *Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi)*, *Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana*, and *Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra*. Respondent's (CBI) Arguments: - The CBI argued that the objective of Article 22(1) is to inform the arrestee of the reason for arrest to enable them to prepare a defence. - They acknowledged that while initially oral communication might have been sufficient, subsequent judgments like *Pankaj Bansal* and *Prabir Purkayastha* mandated written communication. - However, they referred to *Vihaan Kumar* which suggested that the mode and method of communication should achieve the object of the safeguard, whether oral or written. - The CBI further argued that the grounds of arrest are akin to the charge framed and should include basic facts constituting the offence. - They contended that the arrest memo, which contained the 'Reasons for arrest in brief' detailing the demand and acceptance of bribe, constituted sufficient written communication of the grounds of arrest, especially since the arrest occurred before the *Mihir Rajesh Shah* judgment.