IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment establishes that police must justify arrests and follow legal procedures, particularly in non-bailable offenses, to protect individual liberties.

JUDGMENT :

SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.

1. By this Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Petitioner seeks a writ, an Order or direction thereby declaring the Petitioner’s arrest and detention in F.I.R. No. 24 of 2022, registered with Vakola Police station, as illegal. Further, Petitioner seeks a direction to investigate into the alleged illegal action on the part of the Police authorities and subordinates, who have failed to follow the direction issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Anr., (2014) 8 SCC 273 The Petitioner has also sought a direction to the Respondents to pay compensation of Rs.5 Crore to the Petitioner for his illegal detention of 3 days i.e., from 15th January, 2022 to 18th January, 2022.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the record. Senior Police Inspector Mr. Prakash Khandekar and Prakash C. Kamble- P.S.I, have filed independent Affidavit-in-Reply and resisted the Petition on behalf of Respondent No. 7-Vakola Police Station.

3. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith, with the consent of the parties and Petition is taken up for final disposal. Learned A.P.P waives serves on behalf of the Respondents.

4. The facts giving rise to this Petition are that, the Petitioner is a journalist by profession. The Petitioner was arraigned as accused in the F.I.R. No. 24 of 2022, registered with Vakola Police station on 15th January, 2022 under Sections 384 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“I.P.C.”, for short) on the report of Mohd. Akil Siddhique. On the same day, the Petitioner came to be arrested by the Police. The Petitioner was produced before holiday Court i.e., learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court, Mumbai on 16th January, 2022. Said learned Metropolitan Magistrate noted that, the Petitioner was arrested without following the guidelines laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra), hence, remanded the Petitioner to M.C.R. Immediately, bail application was submitted by/on behalf of the Petitioner. The learned Magistrate called for the say of the A.P.P. to the bail Application. The A.P.P. was not present, therefore, the Petitioner had to remain in jail till 18th January, 2022. Ultimately, the bail application was heard by the regular Court i.e. 71st Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, at Bandra, and the Petitioner was granted bail on 18th January, 2022.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that, the offence alleged against the Petitioner were not of a serious nature like murder, rape, dacoity etc. but one u/Sec.384 of I.P.C. which is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both and u/Sec. 506 of I.P.C. which is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both, as the alleged threat was not to cause death or grievous hurt etc. Yet, no reasons were recorded before arresting the Petitioner to justify his arrest. This is clear violation of Section 41 of Cr.P.C. That apart, no notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C. was served upon the Petitioner before arresting him. Therefore, the Petitioner’s arrest, detention in Police custody and in jail for a total period of 3 days i.e., from 15th January, 2022 to 18th January, 2022 was not only unwarranted but also illegal. According to the Petitioner, the Police authorities arrested the Petitioner, just to torture, humiliate and harass him, however, it ultimately deprived the Petitioner of his fundamental right to life and liberty as guaranteed to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the Petition may be allowed, as prayed for.

6. Learned A.P.P. Mrs.Shinde submitted that, the first informant along with others had submitted a written complaint with the Vakola Police station on 10th August, 2021 alleging that the Petitioner was demanding money from them for running their road side small business and in case, t