( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging that on 5th May, 2005 petitioner was called to police station and was taken to the office of A. C. P. at Najafgarh after sunset and produced before Special Executive magistrate, who ordered for furnishing of bail bond. The surety bond was produced by petitioner along with an FDR showing solvency of the surety but the surety bond was sent for verification and the petitioner was sent to jail. It is submitted that there was no need for verification of the surety. She was arrested only under preventive provisions of Sections 107/151 of Cr. P. C. She being a lady could not have been arrested after sunset. She gave a call to the pcr when one Smt. Savitri and her family members started damaging her property. Instead of taking action against the culprits, she was arrested under Sections 107/151 of Cr. P. C. There were about 20 cases against Smt. Savitri and her family members. Daughter of Smt. Savitri was used as a tool for implicating the family members of the petitioner in a false case under Section 365/376 IPC and the entire family of the petitioner was suffering. Thereafter, she narrated how a TV channel AAJ TAK had conducted a sting operation in which certain police officials were seen accepting bribe. She further submitted that on 06th May, 2005 her lawyer appeared before the Special Executive Magistrate and requested for her release but she was not released on the ground that her surety bond had not come after verification. Although, petitioner is a woman but no regard was shown for law in respect of arrest of a person as laid down in D. K. Basu Vs. State of West Bengal case.

( 2 ) STATE has filed status report in this case giving facts that on 04th May, 2005 an information was received from the PCR regarding a quarrel at gali No. 8, Dabri Extension, New Delhi. This information was noted vide DD No. 27a and S. I. Randhir Singh reached at the spot on being entrusted with the DD. He found a large number of people gathered there and petitioner and one Smt. Savitri were found quarreling having stones and bricks in their hands. On his enquiry, Savitri stated that she was getting her house repaired but her neighbour Jagwanti (petitioner) objected to the repairs. Smt. Jagwanti claimed that Smt. Savitri was damaging her property. S. I. Randhir Singh tried to pacify the quarrel but both the ladies were determined to quarrel and were adamant to cause harm to each other. He was left no option but to arrest them under sections 107/151 Cr. P. C. If, he had not arrested them, there was every likelihood that a cognizable offence would have been committed. On the next day, both the ladies were produced before Special Executive Magistrate, South west, who remanded them to judicial custody. Petitioner had submitted her surety bond and the same was sent to the SHO Dabri for verification on the same day. Verification of the surety bond was marked to S. I. Randhir Singh and surety bond was handed over to Head Constable Ashok Kumar with directions to hand over the same to S. I. Randhir Singh. Head Constable, Ashok Kumar handed over the same to S. I. Randhir Singh only on 10th May, 2005. There was a negligence and dereliction of duty on the part of Head Constable, Ashok Kumar and a disciplinary action has been recommended against him.

( 3 ) PRAYER has been made in the writ petition to this court directing registration of a case against respondent nos. 4 to 6 for illegal confinement of the petitioner and for her illegal arrest after sunset. Counsel for the petitioner also sought an enquiry about her being in custody till 11. 05. 2005 and sought a mandamus to the respondents for paying her compensation of Rs. 5 lacs. The other prayer is that Sections 107/151 of Cr. P. C should be declared unconstitutional.

( 4 ) AS far as registration of FIR is concerned, I consider the petitioner should approach the court concerned and lodged a complaint against the accused persons against whom she

Click Here to Read the rest of this document