Kar. HC: De-Nomination of Chairman of Minorities Commission by Govt. Before Term is Not Arbitrary  ||  Delhi High Court: Question of Property Title Can’t be Decided by Forums Under Senior Citizens Act  ||  Jh. HC: Can’t Cancel Bail Unless There is Violation of Bail Conditions or Accused Impedes Fair Trial  ||  Guidelines Issued by Delhi High Court for Trial Court Judges to Decide Transfer Applications  ||  P&H HC: Presence of Magistrate Mandatory to Prove Compliance With Section 52A of the NDPS Act  ||  Meghalaya High Court: In a Sacred Relationship, Husband is the Property of the Wife and Vice Versa  ||  Kar HC: Disciplinary Authority Must Look Into Past Conduct of Workman While Passing Dismissal Order  ||  Ker. HC: Facts Indicating Special Knowledge Must be Estd. by Prosecution to Shift Burden of Proof  ||  Ker. HC: Facts Indicating Special Knowledge Must be Estd. by Prosecution to Shift Burden of Proof  ||  Ker. HC: Independent Evidence of Accomplice Sufficient in Itself to Sustain Conviction    

Harivansh Yadav And Another vs. State Of U.P. - (High Court of Allahabad) (20 May 2021)

Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights



The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants, in Case Crime under Sections-323, 354-B, 452, 504 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that, a civil suit is pending between the parties and as a pressure tactics, the present first information report has been filed with false and concocted story. The applicants have been falsely implicated by the first informant in collusion with the police with ulterior motive. The applicants have no criminal history to their credits. The applicants have definite apprehension that they may be arrested by the police any time.

Present Court finds that there is a case registered against the applicants. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend them. After the lodging of F.I.R., the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for the police to arrest an accused against whom an F.I.R. has been lodged. The courts have repeatedly held that arrest should be the last option for the police and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative or his custodial interrogation is required. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights.

In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission wherein it is mentioned that arrests by the police in India is one of the chief source of corruption in the police. The report suggested that, by and large, nearly 60 percent of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police action accounted for 43.2 percent of expenditure of the jails. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the arrest of an accused should be made.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and their antecedents and also the second surge in the cases of coronavirus and possibility of further surge of the pandemic, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail for limited period in this case.

This anticipatory bail application is being allowed on account of special conditions and on special ground. The normal grounds, settled for the grant of anticipatory bail, have not been considered by this Court and it would be open for the applicants to approach this Court again, if so adviced, in changed circumstances. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved