Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Bharati Dangre, Shyam C.Chandak
Vitthal Mahadeo Shelar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
BHARATI DANGRE J.
1. C.R. No. 2 of 2024 was registered with Kothrud Police Station, Pune, on 5/01/2024 invoking Sections 302 , 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, Section 3 , 25 of Arms Act, 1959 along with relevant provisions of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
The same was based on the information that at 1:20 p.m., Sharad Mohol, who was on his way to Dagdusheth Ganpati Mandir along with three other persons, Munna @ Sahil Polekar and two unknown persons accompanying him, fired at him and caused his death. The information was also provided that Munna Polekar fired at Pramod Sathe, who was walking with complainant behind Sharad.
2. The provisions of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 were invoked in the said FIR on 27/01/2024 though the petitioner was not arraigned as an accused. His name was however added in the C.R., on 13/01/2024, on the basis of suspicion of allegedly hatching criminal conspiracy.
Admittedly, the petitioner Vitthal Mahadeo Shelar was not named as an accused in the FIR. However on 15/01/2024 at 19:30 hours, he was arrested in connection with the said C.R., being arraigned as accused no.15 and his police remand was sought before the J
The failure to communicate grounds of arrest in writing and late production before the Magistrate violates due process, rendering the arrest illegal.
The court upheld the legality of the arrest and remand of the petitioner, affirming compliance with statutory and constitutional requirements.
The court reaffirmed the necessity of timely communication of grounds for arrest, highlighting defendant's rights under Article 22 of the Constitution.
The arrest of an individual must comply with constitutional and statutory requirements, including providing specific grounds for arrest, which must be communicated in writing to ensure the accused's ....
The requirement to inform an arrested person of the grounds for arrest and to ensure access to legal representation is a mandatory constitutional safeguard under Articles 21 and 22.
Failure to provide written grounds for arrest constitutes a violation of fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22, rendering the arrest illegal.
Arrest may be authorised only if concerned officer has ‘reason to believe’ and there is `satisfaction qua an arrest’ that person has committed an offence – There must be a direct nexus or live link b....
The judgment establishes that police must justify arrests and follow legal procedures, particularly in non-bailable offenses, to protect individual liberties.
Arrests must comply with legal requirements, specifically the production before the nearest Magistrate within 24 hours, failing which detention is deemed illegal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
