As per case facts, the Petitioner's house-help (Respondent No. 2) was accused of theft and administering stupefying substances, leading to the father's death. After initial bail rejections, Respondent No. 2 ... was granted bail by the Trial Court due to the non-supply of written grounds of arrest. The Petitioner challenged this, citing suppression of previous bail dismissals and arguing against automatic bail for this reason. The question arose whether the non-supply of written grounds of arrest automatically warrants bail, particularly given the timing of evolving Apex Court judgments on this matter. Finally, the High Court held that at the time of the bail order, the prevailing law mandated written grounds of arrest. Subsequent judgments clarifying that this might be a curable irregularity without automatic bail were pronounced later. Finding no deliberate suppression by Respondent No. 2, the High Court dismissed the petition, upholding the bail.