Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
A.S. Oka and S.S. Shinde, JJ.
Mrs. Bharati S. Khandhar —Petitioner
versus
Maruti Govind Jadhav and Ors. —Respondents
Criminal Writ Petition No. 453 of 2008
Decided on 21.12.2012
For the Petitioner:Ms. Veena Thadani, i/by Mr. Shreeram Shrisat, Advocates.
For the Respondent/State: Mrs. M.M. Deshmukh, APP.
IMPORTANT POINT
Unless the procedure laid down under sub-section (4) of Section 46 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is followed, no woman can be arrested at the whims a wills of the police officers.
Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 46(4) —Arrest of a woman—Prohibited after sunset and before sunrise except in unavoidable circumstances—Prosecution case that the petitioner was on her way to a Family Doctor alongwith her sister when the respondent reached at the house of petitioner and abruptly stopped his bike infront of the car of petitioner—Respondent introduced himself as Sub-Inspector of Police and told the petitioner to accompany him to the Police Station—Petitioner reached the police station at 5.30 p.m. —At the relevant time, respondent police officer was not having the copy of non-bailable warrant issued by the Court—Arrest of petitioner was not effected till 8.45 p.m. on the said night—No prior permission of the Judicial Magistrate was sought for or taken by the police officers—Petitioner was produced before the Magistrate on the next day of arrest who released the petitioner no bail—Writ petition filed by the petitioner alleging that acts of police officials caused enormous mental agony and harassment to the petitioner and her entire family—Whether arrest of the petitioner was in violation of sub-section (4) of Section 46 of the Code—(Yes) —Arrest of the petitioner without following the mandate of provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 46 of the Code was illegal. (Paras 11, 13 and 19)
JUDGMENT
S.S. Shinde, J.— This Writ Petition is filed praying therein to issue direction to the Respondent No.1, i.e. Shri. Maruti Govind Jadhav, to pay compensation to the Petitioner for gross-violation of provisions of law. It is further prayed that, action may be taken against those Respondents-Officers for gross violation of sub-section (4) of Section 46 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as “the Code’”), and further to direct the Respondent No.1 to desist from harassing the Petitioner as well as her family members.
2. Background facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition, in a nutshell, are as under:
It is the case of the Petitioner that on 13th June, 2007, in the evening, the Petitioner was on her way to a Family Doctor alongwith her sister Mrs. Rajeshri B. Khandhar, when the Respondent No.1 reached at the house of the Petitioner and abruptly stopped his bike infront of the car of the Petitioner. The Respondent No.1 introduced himself as Sub-Inspector of Police, Matunga Police Station and rudely told the Petitioner to accompany him to the Police Station.
It is the case of the Petitioner that, the Petitioner enquired with the Respondent No.1 as to under which offence she is being called to the Police Station, to which the Respondent No.1 in a very harsh tone replied that the Petitioner will realize why she is taken to the Police Station, when she reaches the Police Station. It is the case of the petitioner that, the Petitioner vigilantly told the Respondent No.1 that, if he wants to take her to the Police Station, then he should call a Lady Constable. The Respondent No.1 thereafter called a Lady Constable, and after a shortwhile a Lady Constable came and the Petitioner was taken to the Matunga Police Station in a Police Van. The sister of the Petitioner also accompanied the Petitioner to the Police Station.
3. It is the case of the Petitioner that, after the Petitioner reached to the Police Station, the Respondent No.1 arrogantly asked the Petitioner to sit in one corner. After some time, the Petitioner mustered up some courage and asked the
Respondent No.1, the reason for her detention. The Respondent No.1 thereafter called PSI Anant Bapu Gurav, i.e. Respondent No.2 herein, and asked him to arrest the Petitioner. The orders of Respondent No.1 were immediately followed by PSI Gurav without any application of mind and the Petitioner was arrested at 20:45 Hrs. by PSI Gurav. It is the case of the Petitioner that, even at the time of arresting the Petitioner, the grounds of her detention were not made known to the Petitioner. It was only when the sister of the Petitioner requested the Respondent No.1 and PSI Gurav to reveal the grounds of arrest, the Respondent No.1 obliged and told her that the Petitioner is being arrested pursuant to the non-bailable warrant issued by the Allahabad Court.
4. The Petitioner was produced before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Kurla, on the next day of arrest, who released the Petitioner on bail.
5. It is further the case of the Petitioner that, the Petitioner thereafter went to Allahabad Court and got the non-bailable warrant cancelled. It is further the case of the Petitioner that, after coming back from Allahabad, she addressed a letter to the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai and also to the Home Minister, State of Maharashtra and appraised them about the aforesaid incident. However, there was no response to the Petitioner’s letter by the Higher Police Authorities and the Minister. Therefore, the Petitioner was constrained to file this Writ Petition.
6. It is the case of the Petitioner that, not only was the Petitioner harassed by the Respondent-Authorities, but the husband of the Petitioner was also arrested and other family members of the Petitioner are also harassed by the Respondent-Authorities. The Respondents-Officers visited the house of the Petitioner at odd hours and most of the times at night under the prete
