The High Court of Madhya Pradesh ordered to Police and Judicial Magistrate to follow 'Arnesh Kumar' case, guidelines has been released. A big problem among district courts in Madhya Pradesh is that, these courts seem in trouble while granting bails. In 'Arnesh Kumar' case, the judicial bench of the Supreme Court of India finally grants bail to the appellant. In this article, we will discuss about 'Arnesh Kumar' case in brief, and the appropriate guidelines regarding granting bail. Any crime that has punishment for or less than 7 years is generally under this provision.
 |
| Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar case : High Court MP 2021 |
POLICE CANNOT ARREST WITHOUT REASONABLE GROUNDS : ARNESH KUMAR VS STATE OF BIHAR
Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar & Anr case was criminal appeal no. 1277 of 2014 in the Supreme Court of India. Short story was, Sweta Kiran, the wife of Arnesh Kumar lodged an FIR against her mother-in-law & father-in-law stating demand of rupees eight lakh, a Marutii car, an air conditioner, television set, etc. When Arnesh Kumar knew this fact, he stood on behalf of his parents and threatened his wife (Sweta Kiran) to divorce and marry with other lady. Appellant Arnesh Kumar denied all allegations made by his wife and demanded for anticipatory bail which was earlier rejected by Session Judge and thereafter by the High Court.
[Anticipatory bail- CrPC (438) - Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest - (1) When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.]
The Supreme Court of India mentioned some vital points in the final order. Stating -
There is huge increment in matrimonial disputes in recent years. Marriage is considered sacred in Indian culture. Section 498-A IPC was introduced with object to combat the menace of harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. The fact that Section 498-A IPC is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way become to harass her husband and his relatives by using these provisions.
The Apex Court also added that many times she included in her FIR who are bedridden (those person who are unable to walk or are not fit to commit any kind of crime), also sisters who are living in abroad for a decade. Many of them had to face jail because of these provisions of Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 498-A IPC.
The Supreme Court of India also concerned on the data published by the NCRB (National Crime Records Bureau), Ministry of Home Affairs in year 2012. In the data the rate of charge-sheeting in cases under section 498-A IPC was high as 93.6%, while the conviction ratio was merely 15%, lowest across other crimes. According to the supreme court of India, arrest brings humiliation, curtails freedom and downgrades the self esteem of the so called accused one.
Actually, Police in India still consider being in colonial period. They need to read the concept and rules of laws. It is not good if police conflict with lawmakers and behave like dictator after even 60 years of the independence. Thinking of power of arresting is right of police makes it as a tool of harassment, oppression and this is why people in India still do not consider police as their friend. The power of arrest has become one of the main way of source of corruption. Law Commission, Police Commission and Court always tried to protest the basic fundamental rights of citizen, no matter he is facing an allegation. Arrests should not be made only on the basis of if a crime is in cognizable and non-bailable in nature.
The police officers must not arrest anyone merely on the basis of his own contentment, they must present the base proof for arresting.
The Supreme Court of India also mentioned about some humane duties of police officers. They need to ask some questions from themselves before making any arrest. Questions are -
Q.1 Why arrest?
Q.2 Is it really required?
Q.3 What purpose it will serve?
Q.4 What object it will achieve?
An accused arrested without warrant by the police has the constitutional right under Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India and Section 57 CrPC to be produced before the Magistrate. What all has been mentioned in above mentioned sections is not followed seriously by the Police Officers / or even by Magistrates, the Supreme Court added.
Now, I conclude the overview in just a few paragraphs. If any crime is not heinous, then Police cannot arrest the person and keep in detention. If Police does so, there must be valid reason behind it. Reasons when Police can arrest a person without warrant is mentioned in Section 41 CrPC [mainly in CrPC 41(1)(b)(ii)]. Look what exactly is mentioned in Section 41(1)(b)(ii) CrPC -
* The police officer is satisfied that such arrest is necessary -
☑ to prevent such person from committing any further offence; or
☑ for proper investigation of the offence; or
☑ to prevent such person from causing the evidence of the offence to disappear or tampering with such evidence in any manner; or
☑ to prevent such person from making any inducement, threat of promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the police officer; or
☑ as unless such person is arrested, his presence in the Court whenever required cannot be ensured;
and the police officer shall record while making such arrest, his reasons in writing.
If police has not any one of above reasons, the accused cannot be arrested in this provision. Whether police arrest or not, they should inform to Magistrate within 2 weeks. Any kind of delay in this process should require permission from the Superintendent of Police of relevant district.
If Police Officer/Magistrate commit any mistake with their responsibilities under this provision, they will be liable for departmental probe, proper action will be taken against them. Supreme court had given an order to apply this rule in all the states with India. Now, ultimately the High Court of Madhya Pradesh ordered to Police and Sub-Ordinate Judicial to follow this provision in these kind of cases. Actually 'Arnesh Kumar' case was related to Dowry Act & violence against a women, but same alike cases that are not heinous in nature should also be treated with this provision.
For any kind of further updates and more interesting inspirational/knowledgeable articles stay tuned with us. You can visit our YouTube Channel "Digital Soft Hub"
No comments:
Post a Comment