Supreme Court: Air Force Group Insurance Society qualifies as ‘State’ under Article 12  ||  SC: Anganwadi Workers With Degrees Are Eligible For The 29% Quota For Supervisors in Kerala  ||  SC: Giving Accused the Option of Search Before a Police Officer Breaches Section 50 of the NDPS Act  ||  Gujarat HC: Person is Entitled to Compensation For Injury or Death Within Railway Station Premises  ||  Delhi HC: PMLA Can Apply Even if the Scheduled Offence Occurred Before the Law Came Into Force  ||  J&K&L HC: Accused Can Admit Evidence Recorded under Section 299 Crpc After Appearing in Court  ||  J&K&L HC: District Judge Serving as Reference Court under Land Acquisition Act Acts as a Civil Court  ||  Del HC: Subsequent Bail Pleas From Same FIR Should Usually Go Before the Judge Who Denied the First  ||  J&K&L HC: Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, Despite Statutory Status, is Not a ‘State’ under Article 12  ||  SC: Confirmation of an Auction Sale Does Not Bar Judicial Scrutiny of Reserve Price Valuation    

Mxolisi Mananga & Others vs. Minister of Police - (04 Jun 2021)

Arrest, without a warrant is permitted, where an arresting officer held a reasonable suspicion that, a dangerous wound had been inflicted

Criminal

The appeal arose from the dismissal of the appellants’ claim for wrongful and unlawful arrest in the Eastern Cape Division of the High Court, Mthatha. The issue before the present Court, concerned the entitlement of a police officer to arrest a suspect, without a warrant, in terms of Section 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977, on a suspicion that an assault had been committed and a dangerous wound had been inflicted. The Appellants had been involved in an altercation relating to the use of dipping facilities for cattle in the Ncora administrative area, near Confimvaba, in the Eastern Cape. They had allegedly assaulted the complainant, causing him to sustain lacerations to his head and a fractured wrist.

The complainant was admitted to the Cofimvaba Hospital where he was treated, and detained for a period of four days. When a charge with intent to do grievous bodily harm was laid with the South African Police Service at Cofimvaba, Warrant Officer proceeded to Ncora to interview Complainant. He witnessed the injuries sustained and formed the impression that, Complainant had been severely injured to the head and arm. He accordingly arrested the Appellants, without a warrant, and charged them with assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm. They were detained for three days, before appearing in court.

The Appellants misconstrue the nature of the inquiry. It is not required of a police officer to examine the wounds of a victim, as a doctor would, nor would that be appropriate. He is merely required to have regard to the facts and circumstances at his disposal, and, where reasonably possible, to satisfy himself of the merit thereof. If, on a consideration thereof, there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a dangerous wound has been inflicted, he is entitled to arrest the suspect without first obtaining a warrant.

An arrest, without a warrant, in terms of Section 40(1)(b) of the Act, 1977 was permitted under Schedule 1 to the Act, where an arresting officer held a reasonable suspicion that a dangerous wound had been inflicted. It considered that by ‘dangerous wound’ is meant an injury endangering life or limb and that Warrant Officer Qunta reasonably suspected that the appellants had inflicted such injuries to Mr Sambunjana. It accordingly held that the High Court, Mthatha, had correctly concluded that the arrest was lawful. Appeal dismissed.

Tags : ARREST   DETENTION   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved