Table of Contents

The following landmark judgments explain the legal principles governing arrest under the Code of Criminal Procedure (now section 35-62 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) and the Constitution of India. These cases lay down important safeguards relating to arrest, custody, preventive arrest, arrest procedure, rights of the accused, and the duties of police officers while exercising the power of arrest.

1. Amresh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273)

Held: Guidelines for arrest :

  • The law of arrest is one of balancing individual rights, liberties and privileges, on one hand and individual duties, obligations and responsibilities on the other hand.
  •  No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person.
  • No arrest should be made without reasonable satisfaction, reached after some investigation as to the genuineness and bona fide of a complaint and a reasonable belief both as to the person's complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest.
  • A person accused of offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years with or without fine, cannot be arrested by the police unless conditions mentioned in Section 41(1)(b) (now Section 35(1)(b) of BNSS) have been fulfilled.
  • Police officers were directed not to automatically arrest where a case is registered under Section 498-A IPC and also in case where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to 7 years. They have to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down in Section 41, Cr. P.C. (now Section 35 of BNSS).

2. Bhavesh Jayantilal Lakhani v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 2009 SC (Supp) 2432)

Held: It was held that A person sought for an offense in a foreign jurisdiction can be arrested only if the following conditions are met:

  • The offense must also be recognized as a crime under Indian law, and
  • The individual must be subject to arrest in India, either under extradition laws or any other applicable legal provisions.

3. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 6 SCC 642)

Held: Guidelines for arrest:

  • The police personnel carrying out the arrest and handling the interrogation should bear an accurate and clear identification mark with their designation.
  • The police officer carrying out the arrest shall prepare the memo of arrest which shall be attested by at least one witness.
  • Arrested person shall be entitled to have his friend or relative to be informed of his arrest.
  • He must be aware of his right to have someone being informed of his arrest.
  • The arrestee must be examined at the time of arrest and every major or minor injury must be recorded.
  • The arrestee should be subject to medical examination by a trained doctor every 48 hours.
  • The copies of all documents including memo of arrest should be sent to the Magistrate for record.
  • The arrestee must be produced before Magistrate within 24 hours.
  • He must be permitted to meet a lawyer during interrogation.
  • Police control room should be provided at every district and State Headquarters.

4. (Dr.) Rini Johar v. State of M.P. (AIR 2016 SC 2679)

Held: It was held that A person accused of an offence punishable by imprisonment of up to seven years, with or without a fine, cannot be arrested solely based on a police officer's belief that the person has committed the crime. Before making an arrest in such cases, the officer must also be satisfied that it is necessary to prevent the individual from committing further offences, ensure proper investigation, prevent the destruction or tampering of evidence, stop any attempt to influence witnesses, or guarantee the presence of accused in court when required.

5. Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. (1994) 4 SCC 260)

Held: The registration of FIR and arrest of accused person are two different things. It is not correct to say that merely because FIR is registered the accused can be arrested.

6. Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi (AIR 2022 SC 3649)

Held: Supreme Court while reiterating the observation made in Amresh Kumar v. State of Bihar, held that the Police officers have a duty to apply their mind to the case before them and ensure that the condition(s) in Section 41 Cr.P.C. (now Section 35 of BNSS) are met before they conduct an arrest.

7. Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra (1983) 2 SCC 96)

Held: Supreme Court held that accused person must be informed by Magistrate about his right to be medically examined.

8. State of Haryana v. Dinesh Kumar (2008) 3 SCC 222)

Held: It was held that Custody and arrest are not synonymous terms. In every arrest there is custody but not vice-versa. Custody may amount to arrest in certain cases but not in all cases. Custody is physical control or presence of accused in court coupled with submission to the jurisdiction of the court. A person can be in custody when police arrests him or when he surrenders before the court.