Man Arrested Sans Following SC Guidelines On S. 41A CrPC Notice| Haryana Police Apologize To High Court, Initiate Enquiry Against SHO, IO

Update: 2023-12-13 07:26 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

The Haryana police has tendered an unconditional apology before the Punjab & Haryana High Court for arresting an accused without following Supreme Court's direction on giving notice under Section 41-A CrPC before arrest.The submission of the SP, Ambala came after the High Court the Court issued a contempt notice to the SHO and Investigating officer who had arrested an accused person...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Haryana police has tendered an unconditional apology before the Punjab & Haryana High Court for arresting an accused without following Supreme Court's direction on giving notice under Section 41-A CrPC before arrest.

The submission of the SP, Ambala came after the High Court the Court issued a contempt notice to the SHO and Investigating officer who had arrested an accused person violating the Supreme Court directions issued in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr [2022 LiveLaw (SC) 577].

Considering the lapses on the part of investigating officer with respect to non recording of reasons of arrest in writing through check list, departmental enquiry has been ordered to be initiated against the SHO and the Investigating Officer, the SP stated.

Adding that in compliance of the directions issued by the Courts from time to time, the SP has already issued directions for compliance of mandatory provisions of 41 and 41-A CrPC to all the concerned IOs, and SHOs, he stated that, "more intensive training workshops of SHOs and IOs shall be organized regularly for the compliance of latest directions issued by Hon'ble Courts."

Furthermore, the SP stated that the lapses as noted by the High Court were unintentional and he "tendered unconditional and unqualified apology" for the same.

Advocates Amitabh Tiwari, Abhimanyu Tiwari, Siddhant Saroha, Angad Pahel, Ishan Puri appeared for the petitioners.

Krishan K. Chahal, Addl. A.G., Haryana with Viney Phogat, D.A.G., Haryana for the state.

Avinit Avasthi, Advocate for respondent No.2 & 3/complainant.

Case Title: Daggar Malhotra v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Tags:    

Similar News