New Delhi | June 25, 2025
The Government of Karnataka has urged the Supreme Court to clarify that the landmark Pankaj Bansal ruling which mandates that arrested persons be provided with written grounds of arrest should apply only to future cases, and not retroactively.
The submission comes in response to a Karnataka High Court decision that invalidated an arrest made in early 2023, citing non-compliance with the Bansal judgment, even though it was delivered later that year.
In October 2023, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, held that failure to furnish written reasons for arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) violates an accused’s rights under Article 22(1) of the Constitution.
The judgment emphasized that oral communication is insufficient written communication must be made available at the time of arrest to allow an individual to seek effective legal remedy.
Karnataka Government’s Stand
Representing the State, government counsel argued before a Supreme Court bench comprising Justice K.V. Viswanathan and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh that the Bansal judgment explicitly uses the term “henceforth”, indicating a prospective effect.
“The interpretation of procedural safeguards in Bansal cannot be used to invalidate arrests made before October 3, 2023,” the counsel submitted.
“A retrospective application would disrupt thousands of validly conducted investigations.”
The government urged the Court to preserve finality of past proceedings, many of which occurred under existing practices prior to the Bansal clarification.
The Triggering Case
The matter stems from the arrest of Hemanth Datta, a Karnataka resident taken into custody in March 2023 under charges of murder and destruction of evidence. His legal team challenged the arrest on the ground that no written arrest memo was given, invoking the Bansal precedent.
The Karnataka High Court ruled in his favor, quashing the remand order. The State then approached the Supreme Court, seeking a stay and clarification on Bansal’s applicability.
Why This Matters
• If the Supreme Court holds the Bansal ruling retrospective, it could open the door for a flood of bail and quashing petitions from individuals arrested before October 2023.
• On the other hand, a prospective interpretation would preserve past procedures while reinforcing stricter arrest protocols going forward.
The Court’s decision is likely to set a major precedent affecting police practices across all states and under various special laws like the PMLA, NDPS Act, and UAPA.
Case Title: State of Karnataka v. Hemanth Datta & Ors.
