LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/kasireddy-upender-reddy-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-and-ors-20250523/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Kasireddy Upender Reddy vs State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
23 May 2025
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 2808 of 2025
Bench
J.B. Pardiwala, R Mahadevan
Citation
[2025] 7 S.C.R. 105 : 2025 INSC 768
Acts & Sections
Constitution Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 CrPC
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 7 S.C.R. 105 : 2025 INSC 768
Issue for consideration
Whether the arrest of the appellant’s son was per se illegal for want of supply of appropriate and meaningful grounds of arrest, as alleged.
Headnote

Constitution of India – Art.22 – When not violated – Appellant filed writ petition before High Court seeking a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that his son was illegally arrested by CID as appropriate grounds for arrest were not furnished at the time of arrest and thus, the arrest was violative of Art.22 – Writ petition dismissed – Sustainability:

Held: If a person is arrested on a warrant, the grounds for reasons for the arrest is the warrant itself; if the warrant is read over to him, that is sufficient compliance with the requirement that he should be informed of the grounds for his arrest – If he is arrested without a warrant, he must be told why he has been arrested – If he is arrested for committing an offence, he must be told that he has committed a certain offence for which he would be placed on trial – In order to inform him that he has committed a certain offence, he must be told of the acts done by him which amounts to the offence – He must be informed of the precise acts done by him for which he would be tried; informing him merely of the law applicable to such acts would not be enough – The information of the grounds of arrest must be provided to the arrested person in a manner that sufficient knowledge of the basic facts constituting the grounds is imparted and communicated to the arrested person effectively in the language which he understands – The mode and method of communication must be such that the object of the constitutional safeguard is achieved – Appellant’s son was arrested for specific offences as mentioned in the grounds of arrest – The grounds of arrest show that the requirement in terms of para 21(b) as laid down in Vihaan Kumar’s case is fulfilled – No merit in this appeal – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – ss.47, 48, 35 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.41(1). [Paras 25, 36] Constitution of India – Art. 22 – Judgment of Supreme Court in Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana and another – Constitutional protections against arbitrary arrest and detention – Rights of individuals upon arrest – Principles of law explained in Vihaan Kumar, enumerated. [Paras 15, 18]

Keywords: Article 22 of the Constitution of India · Grounds of arrest · Arrested on a warrant · Arrested without a warrant · Appropriate and meaningful grounds of arrest · At the time of arrest · Writ of habeas corpus · Vihaan Kumar case · Information of the grounds of arrest · Sufficient knowledge of the basic facts · Arrest by CID

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment J.B. Pardiwala, J. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2808 OF 2025 (@ SLP (CRIMINAL) No. 7746 OF 2025) 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal arises from the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati dated 8.05.2025 in W.P. No. 10858 of 2025 by which the writ petition filed by the appellant herein seeking a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that his son viz. Kessireddy Raja Shekhar Reddy came to be illegally arrested by the CID and is in unlawful detention, came to be dismissed. 3. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be summarised as under: a. The son of the
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →