'Alarming': MP High Court Says Police May Be Deliberately Ignoring Arrest Procedure To Help Accused Secure Release

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the Director General of Police to issue a circular warning all investigating officers over strict compliance with Section 47 BNSS requirement and Supreme Court guidelines in the Pankaj Bansal case, which mandates that grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing. The division bench of Justice GS Ahluwalia and Justice Anuradha Shukla further added that non-compliance would raise the presumption that the grounds in writing were deliberately not supplied to the accused with malafide intention to facilitate him to seek release by claiming the arrest is illegal. Calling the police's action as an "alarming situation' where it was not adhering to its own circulars the bench observed:"It appears that Police Department itself is not ready to adhere to the circulars issued by the Police Headquarters. Either it is on account of negligence on the part of Investigating Officer or it is done deliberately by the Investigating Officer in order to create a ground for the accused to get released by getting his arrest declared as illegal. In both the circumstances, it is an alarming situation for the Police department, who instead of upholding the majesty of law, is trying very hard to some how protect the wrongdoers. If the Police Headquarters is of the view that by hook and crook wrong doers are to be protected, then it must introspect itself as to whether it is meant for protection of innocent persons by prosecuting the offenders or the Police department is meant for protecting the offenders.In case if Police Headquarter is of the view that the Police department is meant for protection of innocent persons by prosecuting the offenders, then they must take harsh and coercive action against those Police Officers who either bonafidely or intentionally leave lacuna so that the accused may get benefit of the same. In this case also although this Court has held that the notice issued under section 50 of the NDPS Act to the brother of petitioner who has been arrayed as an accused in Crime No.111/2026, is a substantial compliance, but the Police department must realize that when a certain action is to be taken in a particular manner, then it must be done, otherwise it should draw a presumption that non compliance of law laid down by Supreme Court, as well as, circular dated 13/2/2026 issued by Police Headquarters (CID), M.P., Bhopal was with a clear intention to facilitate the offenders and must take harsh departmental action against such persons, who although wear the Police uniform, but from the bottom of their heart, they are with the offenders".These observations were made in a habeas corpus petition filed by a man challenging his brother's arrest under the NDPS Act, claiming that grounds of arrest were not communicated to him in writing. A similar objection was raised before the Trial Court, which rejected the objection on the ground that since 86.85 kgs of Ganja were seized from his possession. The Trial Court noted that the accused was given a written notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, which prescribes the conditions for the search of a person. The petitioner was also given written information about the arrest. The Trial Court noted that since the petitioner was already informed about the reasons of arrest under notice of Section 50 NDPS Act, there was substantial compliance with Section 47 BNSS, which mandates police or other arresting authority to communicate the grounds of arrest and right to bail. Thus, it was held that the arrest was legal.The high court, referring to the case of Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India, Mihir Rajesh Shah, held that the only reason to furnish reasons of arrest in writing is to remove the controversy over whether the arrestee was informed about reasons of arrest or not, as the case might be, when reasons are orally communicated. In the present case, the court noted, "It is true that reasons for arrest were not communicated to him separately but the moment a notice under section 50 of NDPS Act was given pointing out that he is required to be bodily searched for the contraband and the contrabands were also seized from the vehicle and seizure memos were also prepared which were duly signed by the accused, then it cannot be said that accused was not aware about the reasons of his arrest. Furthermore petitioner/brother of accused was also duly informed by Police". The bench noted that after its judgment in the case of Anil Mishra, the department had issued a circular directing the police officers to mandatorily inform about the grounds, in writing and in a language understood by the arrested person. If providing information in writing is not possible, the same may be stated orally immediately after the arrest, and at least two hours prior to being produced before a Magistrate. The circular also included a form for information regarding grounds of arrest. It further warned that non-compliance with said directions will lead...

'Alarming': MP High Court Says Police May Be Deliberately Ignoring Arrest Procedure To Help Accused Secure Release

Jayanti Pahwa

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Jayanti Pahwa

'Alarming': MP High Court Says Police May Be Deliberately Ignoring Arrest Procedure To Help Accused Secure Release

Jayanti Pahwa

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Jayanti Pahwa

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers