'Arnesh Kumar' Guidelines For Arrest Applicable To Offences Punishable With Less Than 7 Yrs Imprisonment: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that directions passed by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar with respect to procedure for arrest shall be applicable to offences punishable with less than or up to seven years of imprisonment.The bench comprising Justice Anoop Chitkara while dealing with an anticipatory bail plea in an FIR registered under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, observed, Thus, directions passed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, (Para 13), apply to this petition, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court directed all the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to arrest the accused automatically when the 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. It added that the petitioner-accused, who was a first time offender, should be granted an opportunity to course-correct. The court further observed that the possibility of the accused influencing the investigation, tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, and the likelihood of fleeing justice, can be dealt with by imposing elaborative and stringent conditions. After relying on the judgement of Sushila Aggarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 1, Para 92, and Sumit Mehta v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi, (2013)15 SCC 570, Para 11 the court said it can impose conditions to ensure an uninterrupted and unhampered investigation. Court further observed that while granting bail with sureties, the "Court" and the "Arresting Officer" should give a choice to the accused to furnish surety bonds in various online and offline ways available, or can create a lien over his bank account as has been held in the case of Mahidul Sheikh v. State of Haryana. It shall be the total discretion of the applicant to choose between surety bonds and fixed deposits. It shall also be open for the applicant to apply for substitution of fixed deposit with surety bonds and vice-versa. Court concluded by stating that the petitioner shall be in deemed custody as per Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and he shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer. Failure to corporate with the investigation will be a ground to seek cancellation of the bail. If the petitioner fails to forward complete details of bank account along with other relevant information to the Investigator/SHO and the complainant/victim(s), then on this ground alone the bail might be cancelled, the court added. According, the petition was allowed.Read Arnesh Kumar guidelines here. Case Title : Rajeev Kumar v. State of HaryanaCitation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 162 Click Here To Read/Download Order

'Arnesh Kumar' Guidelines For Arrest Applicable To Offences Punishable With Less Than 7 Yrs Imprisonment: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Drishti Yadav

Tags