CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1277 OF 2014
(@SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) No.9127 of 2013)
ARNESH KUMAR ….. APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. …. RESPONDENTS
J U D G M E N T
NEW DELHI,
July 2, 2014.
Our endeavour in this judgment is to ensure
that police officers do not arrest accused
unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorise
detention casually and mechanically. In order
to ensure what we have observed above, we give
the following direction:

(1) All the State Governments to instruct its
police officers not to automatically arrest
when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC
is registered but to satisfy themselves
about the necessity for arrest under the
parameters laid down above flowing from
Section 41, Cr.PC;
(2) All police officers be provided with a
check list containing specified sub-clauses
under Section 41(1)(b)(ii);
(3) The police officer shall forward the check
list duly filed and furnish the reasons and
materials which necessitated the arrest,
while forwarding/producing the accused
before the Magistrate for further
detention;
(4) The Magistrate while authorising detention
of the accused shall peruse the report
furnished by the police officer in terms
aforesaid and only after recording its
satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorise
detention;
(5) The decision not to arrest an accused, be
forwarded to the Magistrate within two
weeks from the date of the institution of
the case with a copy to the Magistrate
which may be extended by the Superintendent
of police of the district for the reasons
to be recorded in writing;
(6) Notice of appearance in terms of Section
41A of Cr.PC be served on the accused
within two weeks from the date of
institution of the case, which may be
extended by the Superintendent of Police of
the District for the reasons to be recorded
in writing;
(7) Failure to comply with the directions
aforesaid shall apart from rendering the
police officers concerned liable for
departmental action, they shall also be
liable to be punished for contempt of court
to be instituted before High Court having
territorial jurisdiction.
(8) Authorising detention without recording
reasons as aforesaid by the judicial
Magistrate concerned shall be liable for
departmental action by the appropriate High
Court.
We hasten to add that the directions
aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases
under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4
of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in
hand, but also such cases where offence is
punishable with imprisonment for a term which
may be less than seven years or which may
extend to seven years; whether with or without
fine.
We direct that a copy of this judgment be
forwarded to the Chief Secretaries as also the
Director Generals of Police of all the State
Governments and the Union Territories and the
Registrar General of all the High Courts for
onward transmission and ensuring its
compliance.

Nitish Banka

Nitish Banka is an advocate practicing in Supreme Court of India and can be reached at [email protected] or 9891549997