Supreme Court Summons Haryana DGP Over Illegal Arrest Violating 'Arnesh Kumar' Guidelines

The Supreme Court recently directed the personal appearance of the Director General of Police, Haryana, since no action was reported to have been taken against police officials who arrested a person in violation of the directions passed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014).

In Arnesh Kumar, the Supreme Court passed several guidelines to curb unnecessary and casual arrest, and directed that if the offences are punishable with less than seven years' imprisonment, then arrest should not be the norm. It was directed that police should satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down in Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It should also furnish reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest.

In the present case, it was alleged that there has been a blatant violation of the Arnesh Kumar directions as the petitioner was arrested without giving notice under Section 41A of the CrPC for offence under Sections 185, 189 and 353 of the IPC. On the other hand, the police claimed that a notice was served but the petitioner refused to sign and did not cooperate with the investigation.  

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed a civil contempt petition filed by the petitioner on January 12, 2023, against which the present special leave petition was filed. 

Before the Supreme Court, the State's counsel submitted that some action was taken by the State, as there was a direction to the concerned Superintendent of Police to initiate action. However, the Court noted that what transpired after the said direction remains unknown.

Considering this, a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prashant Kumar Mishra observed:

"We do not find any valid ground for the State to drag its legs in an important issue where rights of a common citizen, especially relating to his liberty are involved. Once the Superintendent of Police was directed to initiate action, it would appear that even the higher authorities themselves found some substance in the petitioner's allegations. However, no action taken, if any actually, has been brought on record till date. In this backdrop, we direct for the personal appearance of the Director General of Police, Haryana on the next date."

The Court added that if by March 23 it is brought to the notice of the Court that some substantive action has been taken, the DGP Haryana need not physically appear before the Court.

The matter is listed to be heard on March 26.

Case Details: VIJAY PAL YADAV v. MAMTA SINGH AND ORS|Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.20330/2023

Appearances: Petitioner- Ravinder Kumar Yadav, AoR; Vinay Mohan Sharma, Adv.; Arti Anupriya, Adv.; Kartikey, Adv.; Paras Juneja, Adv.; Amir Yad, Adv.; Vineet Yadav, Adv. Kritika Yadav, Adv

Respondent: Akshay Amritanshu, AoR; Arun Tewatia, Adv.; Saurabh Sachdeva, Adv.;Pragya Upadhyay, Adv. and Drishti Saraf, Adv. 

Click Here To Read Order