Police Must Strictly Comply With Arnesh Kumar Safeguards; Procedural Lapses Cannot Be Taken Lightly: Chhattisgarh High Court
The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that strict adherence to the safeguards governing arrest and remand, particularly the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, is of paramount importance and that procedural lapses by police officials cannot be treated casually. The Court observed that every police officer is under a statutory obligation to comply with...
The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that strict adherence to the safeguards governing arrest and remand, particularly the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, is of paramount importance and that procedural lapses by police officials cannot be treated casually. The Court observed that every police officer is under a statutory obligation to comply with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the law declared by the Supreme Court, and that accountability must be ensured to prevent recurrence of such lapses.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal was hearing a writ petition seeking departmental action against police officials who had allegedly violated the directions issued by a Judicial Magistrate First Class, following an incident in which police personnel allegedly conducted an illegal search, assaulted the petitioner's family members, and failed to comply with the safeguards governing arrest. The petitioner contended that despite the Magistrate's observations that the police conduct was prima facie contrary to the law laid down in Arnesh Kumar and directions to initiate action against the erring officials, no departmental proceedings had been initiated and his subsequent representation remained undecided.
During the proceedings, the High Court directed the Superintendent of Police to file a personal affidavit explaining the action taken. The affidavit disclosed that a fact-finding enquiry had been conducted through the City Superintendent of Police and that while no misconduct was found, procedural lapses had been established against the Investigating Officer. Based on the enquiry, the officer had been issued a warning.
The Court observed that the Superintendent of Police had acted upon the Magistrate's order by directing an enquiry and initiating administrative action, thereby addressing the grievance regarding official inaction. However, it emphasised that a mere warning should not be viewed as the culmination of the matter. The Bench clarified that the importance of adhering to the Arnesh Kumar guidelines stemmed from the law declared by the Supreme Court in that decision.
“… compliance with the mandate of law, particularly the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra), is of paramount importance and cannot be diluted by treating such lapses casually,” the Court observed.
Accordingly, while declining to keep the writ petition pending, the Court directed the Superintendent of Police, Korba, to keep the service conduct and future performance of the concerned Head Constable under close watch. It further directed that if any similar lapse, negligence or misconduct was noticed in future, appropriate disciplinary proceedings should be initiated in accordance with law, and that all police personnel under his administrative control must strictly comply with the statutory safeguards governing arrest, remand and investigation.
Case Title: Ajay Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. [W.P.(Cr.) No. 370 of 2026]