The Telangana High Court while considering a Pre-arrest bail application has issued a significant order on arrest of an accused after issuance of notice under Section 41-A of Cr.PC.
Justice Lalitha Kanneganti ruled that:
It is appropriate to mention that after issuance of notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., if the police feels that the accused has to be arrested, without obtaining the permission from the Magistrate concerned, they cannot arrest the accused.
The High Court was hearing a Pre-Arrest bail application for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 read with Section 34 IPC.
Counsel for the petitioner Mr.Rajender Khanna, submitted that in earlier Petition filed by petitioner for pre-arrest bail, this Court has directed the police concerned to follow the procedure under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., and the guidelines formulated by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar .
He submitted that after disposal of the said petition, petitioner was issued notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., and he has appeared before the police on two occasions, and whenever he appeared before them, there was no receipt of acknowledgment from the police and he was constrained to sent all the relevant material to the Director General of Police as well as Commissioner of Police.
Counsel added that that in all the cases where notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., was issued, the police are not issuing any acknowledgment and some times, they are coming up saying that the accused is not cooperating with the investigation and taking steps to arrest the accused, and hence, the petitioner’s case may be considered for grant of pre-arrest bail.
On the other hand, Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted the police have issued notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., and they are already following the guidelines formulated by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar’s case (supra).
After hearing the Court observed:
This Court has already directed the Director General of Police to frame guidelines with regard to issuance of acknowledgment in the cases where accused appears before the police under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., and the same cannot be at the whims and fancies of the police. If the accused feels that the police failed to follow the procedure under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. or the guidelines of the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar’s case (supra), they could as well come before this Court by filing contempt petition against the concerned police officer with relevant material to substantiate their allegations, but on this basis, they cannot seek anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition was disposed of, directing the police concerned to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., and the guidelines formulated by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar’s case (supra).