This is an archive article published on January 31, 2025
Bombay HC’s larger bench to clear ‘total confusion’ on arrest procedure issues, need for communicating grounds in writing
The court also referred to an issue of whether the grounds of arrest be furnished to an individual at the time of arrest or any time before considering the first remand application filed by the probing agency.
The larger bench was approached on an issue of interpretation of Section 50 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which mandates the police to inform an individual about the grounds of arrest and right of bail. (File Image)
A two-judge bench of the Bombay High Court on Friday referred an issue of whether the grounds for arrest are required to be communicated in writing to the detained person or whether an oral communication will be sufficient for legal arrest to a larger bench consisting of three or more judges.
It referred to the larger bench an issue of interpretation of Section 50 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which mandates the police to inform an individual about the grounds of arrest and right of bail. The high court said that the decisions on the ‘ambiguity’ related to arrest procedures will affect the majority of the cases wherein the accused are arrested till date.
It said that there was a ‘total confusion’ and ‘lack of clarity’ in the minds of the investigating agency on the issue, as arrested accused are approaching various courts seeking release on bail citing that grounds of arrest were not conveyed to them in writing and other arrest procedures were not complied with.
A division bench of Justices Sarang V Kotwal and Shriram M Modak passed a verdict on a clutch of petitions seeking release of the accused persons alleging violation of provisions of Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking release due to ‘illegal arrest.’
“There is a lack of clarity even in respect of the forums, which can grant such a relief. In some cases, this has given rise to unhealthy practices of choosing a forum for the same relief. The same issues, simultaneously, are being contested before the different forums and, therefore, there is a serious possibility of conflict of decisions by different courts across the state,” the court noted.
The bench said there is a “serious possibility” of conflict of decisions by different courts across the state.
“In some of the cases, due to lack of awareness on the part of the investigating agencies, the accused are claiming benefits even in the most serious or heinous crimes like, rape, murder along with offences under the POCSO Act, MCOC Act and NDPS Act,” said the bench.
Therefore, Justice Kotwal said, there was a “need to strike a balance between the rights of the victims and those of accused” and the issues framed by it required ‘serious consideration’ by a larger bench.
Story continues below this ad
The court also referred to an issue of whether the grounds of arrest be furnished to an individual at the time of arrest or any time before considering the first remand application filed by the probing agency.
The other issues include whether the court will have discretion, depending on the gravity of the offence or circumstances in which the accused is arrested. The larger bench will also decide before which forum the arrested person can raise his/her grievance and seek release for non-compliance by the probing agency.
Another issue referred is whether in all cases, the notice of appearance under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is required to be issued by the investigating officer before arrest and if the same was required when the offence was punishable for upto seven years of imprisonment.
The court opined that apart from the issues related to communication of grounds of arrest, “some clear and definite guidelines are required to the magistrates and investigating agencies to follow procedures of giving remand reports to the arrested person sufficiently in advance.”
Story continues below this ad
The court asked its registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice to constitute a larger bench at earliest as the issue involved a large number of arrested persons.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More