Arrest is not mandatory in every cognizable offense and the police have the discretion to arrest or not to arrest based on the circumstances of the case.

( 1 ) ONE of the points urged by the learned counsel for the applicants is that this Court should direct that the applicants, who are ladies, should not be arrested till the conclusion of the trial.

( 2 ) IN the decision of a five Judge Full Bench of this Court in Dr. Vinod Narain v. State of U. P. in Writ Petition No. 3643 of 1992 (1996 Cri LJ) it has been held that this Court cannot direct consideration of bail on the same day and by a 3-2 majority it was also held that this Court cannot even direct grant of interim bail. It may be mentioned that the only 2 questions referred to the Full Bench were whether the High Court can direct consideration of the bail application on the same day it is moved, and whether this Court can direct grant of interim bail. No other question was referred. However while dealing with the questions referred Honble PALOK BASU, J. (whose view has been followed by two other Honble Judges) has also observed as follows :"once disclosure of cognizable offence is made, arrest of the acc+used or suspect is a "must", for there is no other known method by which he may be brought before the Court for trial".

( 3 ) WITH great respect to the said observation, in my humble opinion it is in direct conflict with the view expressed by the Supreme Court in Joginder Kumar v. State of U. P. , 1994 (4) SCC 260 : (1994 Cri LJ 1981) and hence the matter needs to be reconsidered by a larger bench.

( 4 ) IN Joginder Kumar v. State of U. P. , 1994 (4) SCC 260 : (1994 Cri LJ 1981 ). The Supreme Court has observed "no arrest can be made because it is lawful for the Police Officer to do so. The existence of the power to arrest is one thing. The justification for the exercise of it is quite another. The Police Officer must be able to justify the arrest apart from his power to do so. Arrest and detention in police lockup of a person can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self esteem of a person. No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person. It would be prudent for a Police Officer in the interest of protection of the Constitutional rights of a citizen and perhaps in his own interest that no arrest should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to the genuineness and bonafides of a complaint and a reasonable belief both as to the persons complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter. The recommendations of the Police Commission merely reflect the constitutional concomitants of the fundamental right to personal liberty and freedom. A person is not liable to arrest merely on the suspicion of complicity in an offence. There, must be some reasonable justification in the opinion of the Officer effecting the arrest that such arrest is necessary and justified. Except in heinous offences, an arrest must be avoided if a Police Officer issues notice to a person to attend the Station House and not to leave the station without permission would do".

( 5 ) THE Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision referred to the National Police Commissions third report wherein it is stated that the arrest by the Police in India is one of the chief sources of corruption. The report suggested that, by and large, nearly 60% of the arrests were either unnecessarily or unjustified.

( 6 ) THE Supreme Court also quoted with approval the report of the National Police Commission which states :-"an Arrest during the investigation of a cognizable case may be considered justified in one or other of the following circumstances : (i) The case involves a grave offence like murder, dacoity, robbery, rape etc. and it is necessary to arrest the accused and bring his movements under restraint to infuse confidence among the terror stricken victims. (ii) The accused is given to violent behaviour and is likely to abscond and evade the processes of law. (iii) The accused is given to violent b