Posts tagged ‘detention’

Arneshkumar v/s State of Bihar and another

The Supreme Court in Arneshkumar v/s State of Bihar and another, observed that there is rampant misuse of the provisions of Sec. 498-A of IPC and Sec 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. In order to bring the situation under control the Supreme Court has passed the following guidelines.
The Supreme Court, through this judgement ensures that -
i. The Police officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and
ii. The Magistrate do not authorise detention casually and mechanically.
The State Governments are directed by this Judgement:
1. To instruct the Police officers not to automatically arrest when the case is registered under section 498-A of the IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act, until it satisfies the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down in section 41 of CrPC.
2. The Police Officers to be provided with the check list containing specified sub-clauses under section 41(1)(b)(ii) of CrPC. The said check list shall be duly filled and the police officer shall furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while producing the accused before magistrate for further detention.
3. The Magistrate on inspecting the report furnished by the Police officer, only after recording its satisfaction, shall authorise the detention of the accused.
4. The decision not to arrest an accused is to be forwarded to the Magistrate within 2 weeks from the date of institution of case with a copy to Superintendent of Police which may be extended by the superintendent of Police for reasons to be recorded in writing.
5. Notice of appearance in terms of section 41 CrPC shall be served to accused within 2 weeks of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of District for the reasons to be recorded in writing.
6. Failure to comply with the directions given above, the police officer concerned shall be liable for departmental action and punished and , the contempt of court is to be instituted against them before the High Court having territorial jurisdiction.
7. Authorising detention without recording reasons as above said, by the Judicial Magistrate concerned, shall make the Magistrate liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court also clarifies that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under sec. 498-A of the IPC or sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, but also to 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.
Authored by:
Shrinivasreddy Mudagannavar
Intern
Mento Associates