Back
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SOURENDRA PANDEY
Arvind Kumar Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J. – Heard Mr. Nagendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma, learned AC to AG for the State of Bihar.
2. The S.H.O., Makhdumpur Police Station, Jehanabad (Respondent No. 7), the S.H.O., Town Police Station, Jehanabad (Respondent No. 8) and Mr. Pranav Kumar who is the I.O. of this case have appeared in person as advised by learned AC to AG.
3. Since the I.O. is not a party respondent in this case, to let the records complete, Mr. Pranav Kumar, the I.O. of the case be made party Respondent No. 12.
4. In the morning at 10:30 AM when the writ application was taken up for purpose of judgment, on the request of learned AC to AG for the State of Bihar, we have further heard him. We also heard Respondent Nos. 7, 8 and 12 at length.
Brief Facts of the Case
5. This writ application has been filed seeking a writ in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus for a direction to the respondents to release private Respondent Nos. 9 to 11 from the illegal detention of police.
6. The petitioner who is the son-in-law of Respondent No. 9, brother-in-law of Respondent No. 10 and cousin brother-in-law of Respondent No. 11 approached this Court invoking
Police must comply with legal procedures in arrests; failure to inform family or follow due process constitutes unlawful detention, justifying compensation.
The judgment establishes the importance of upholding the rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the need for a reasonable basis for arrest under the Cr.P.C.
The failure to disclose grounds for arrest and non-compliance with procedural requirements rendered the detention illegal, warranting intervention via habeas corpus.
Unauthorized detention of minors violates fundamental rights; presumption of innocence must be maintained, and lawful procedures need to be followed during arrest.
The case reinforces the necessity of informing arrestees of the grounds for their arrest and complying with preventive detention laws, establishing that unlawful arrests lead to compensation for viol....
(1)Habeas Corpus Petition – Illegal detention – Direction of DIG, to investigate case assuming allegations to be true is against principles of presumption of innocence which is Cardinal Principle of ....
The court established that police officers must comply with statutory requirements before arresting another officer, and failure to do so constitutes a violation of fundamental rights under Article 2....
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
