Introduction 

• This is a landmark judgment that laid down guidelines for Arrest. 
• The judgment was delivered by a 3-judge bench consisting of Justice MN Venkatachalliah, Justice S. Mohan and Justice AS Anand.  

Facts 

• In this case a petition was filed by a young man of 28 years old who was detained in the police custody.  
• The brother of the petitioner, being apprehensive of the intentions of Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) made enquiries about his whereabouts. 
• On 7th January 1994 it came to be known that the petitioner was detained in illegal custody in Mussoorie. 
• The Court ordered notice to the State of U.P. as well as SSP, Ghaziabad. 
• The SSP along with the petitioner appeared before the Court.  
  • When enquired about it the said SSP submitted that the petitioner was not in detention at all, and his help was taken in detecting some cases. 

Issue Involved  

• Whether there is a need for Guidelines on Arrest?

Observations 

• The law of arrest provides for balancing of balancing of individual rights and liberties on one hand and individual duties and responsibilities on the other.  
• On the one hand there is a social need that crime should be repressed and on the other hand there is a need that law should not be flouted by the insolence of office. 
• The Court observed that the existence of power to arrest is one thing and the justification for exercise of the power is quite another. 
  • The police must be able to justify the arrest. 
  • Arrest and detention in police lock up can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self esteem of a person. 
  • Arrest cannot be made routinely on an allegation of an offence against a person. 
  • Except in heinous offences, an arrest must be avoided if the police officer issues notice to the person to attend the Station House.  
• Further, the Court also laid down guidelines regarding the right to have someone informed regarding arrest. 
  • An arrested person being held in custody is entitled, if he so requests to have one friend, relative or other person who is known to him or likely to take an interest in his welfare told as far as is practicable that he has been arrested and where he is being detained.  
  • The police officer shall inform the arrested person when he is brought to the police station of this right.  
  • An entry shall be required to be made in the diary as to who was informed of the arrest. These protections from power must be held to flow from Articles 21 and 22(1) and enforced strictly. It shall be the duty of the Magistrate, before whom the arrested person is produced, to satisfy himself that these requirements have been complied with.
• The Court held that the above guidelines must be followed till legal provisions are made in this regard. 

Conclusion 

• The Supreme Court in this case laid down the guidelines for arrest.  
  • The guidelines were regarding two aspects: firstly, arrest should not happen routinely and secondly, a person should be informed about their arrest.  
  • These guidelines have been included in the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) after the amendment in CrPC.