Claim
From the trial court up to the High Court, courts stated clearly that the Constitution gives every citizen the right to be informed of proper, concrete grounds at the time of arrest.
“निचली अदालत से लेकर हाई कोर्ट तक ने साफ कह दिया कि देश का संविधान हर नागरिक को यह अधिकार देता है कि उस गिरफ्तारी के समय उसे सही पुख्ता कारण बताए जाए।”▶ Watch source segment
Rationale
The claim restates a well-established principle of Indian constitutional law. Article 22(1) guarantees every arrested person the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest, and a consistent line of judgments (Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India 2023, Prabir Purkayastha v. State 2024, and a November 2025 Supreme Court ruling) — applied and echoed by trial courts and High Courts — holds that concrete, specific grounds must be communicated at the time of arrest, failing which the arrest is illegal. The anchor's statement that courts from the trial level up to the High Court affirmed this constitutional right is an accurate characterization of settled law as of the broadcast date.
Evidence
- https://indiankanoon.org/doc/581566/ Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India expressly guarantees that no arrested person shall be detained without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for the arrest — the constitutional right the claim describes. ✓ reachable · archived
- https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2025/11/07/communicating-grounds-of-arrest-to-arrestee-is-mandatory-supreme-court/ November 2025 Supreme Court ruling holds that communicating concrete grounds of arrest is a mandatory constitutional requirement, and non-compliance renders the arrest and remand illegal. ✓ reachable · archived
- https://theleaflet.in/supreme-court/giving-grounds-of-arrest-mandatory-not-formality-supreme-court Supreme Court states giving grounds of arrest is mandatory and not a mere formality, reinforcing that the accused must be told the real, specific reasons for arrest. ✓ reachable · archived
- https://blog.ipleaders.in/article-22-of-the-indian-constitution/ Explains that Article 22(1), as interpreted through cases like Pankaj Bansal (2023) and Prabir Purkayastha (2024), requires grounds of arrest to be conveyed meaningfully; consistently upheld across trial courts, High Courts and the Supreme Court. ✓ reachable · archived