The power of arrest and the necessity to arrest are distinct, and the court must ensure that factual inaccuracies in its orders are corrected.

JUDGMENT :

By means of the instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek the following reliefs:-

(a) CALL for the records pertaining to SC/ST Case No.06/2020 which was pending before the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Nainital and quash/set aside the Impugned Orders dated 09.09.2022, 23.09.2023 and 06.01.2023, to the limited extent to which they state that the petitioners were “released from the police station”, and expunge the adverse remarks passed against them; and

(b) Pass any other order(s) that this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interests of justice.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. The record reveals that on an FIR No.3 of 2020, lodged at Revenue Police Station Sarna, Tehsil Dhari, District Nainital, after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted and the proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.6 of 2020, State vs. Smt. Parvati Lal and another was instituted against the petitioner in the court of District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Nainital (for short, “the case”). The petitioners challenged the proceedings of the case in Criminal Misc. Application No.530 of 2020, Karthik Jayashankar and another vs. State of Uttarakhand and another (for short, “the petition”). The petition was allowed by this Court on 22.08.2022. Paras 44 and 45 of the order dated 22.08.2022 of this Court, passed in the petition are relevant which are as hereunder:-

“44. The above factors taken together make this Court to conclude that, in fact, the respondent no.2 initiated the proceedings with malafide. The entire proceedings are vitiated by malafide. Accordingly, it deserves to be quashed.

45. The petition is allowed. The impugned chargesheet, cognizance order and entire proceedings of the case are quashed.”

4. The grievance of the petitioners did not stop here, it continued, even thereafter. Pursuant to the order dated 22.08.2022, when the concerned court took up the case, it passed an order on 09.09.2022, it recorded two statements namely, (i) the proceedings of the case had been quashed on the basis of amicable settlement between the parties and; (ii) the petitioners were released from the police station under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Code”).

5. It has been the grievance of the petitioner that, in fact, the petition was not decided on the basis of amicable settlement between the parties and secondly, the petitioners were never taken into custody; they were never released from any police station. In order to seek correction in the order dated 09.09.2022, passed in the case, petitioners moved an application before the concerned court on 23.09.2022. That application dated 23.09.2022 was decided by an order dated 23.09.2022 passed in the case. The court although corrected that the petition had not been decided on the basis of the amicable settlement. But, the court refused to correct the statement as recorded in its order dated 09.09.2022 to the effect that the petitioners were released from police station on a notice under Section 41A of the Code.

6. The petitioners were still aggrieved. They moved another application on 06.01.2023, so that the record may be corrected and it should not reveal factually un-correct statement. It has been the case of the petitioners that they were never taken into the custody; they were never released from the police station. The application dated 06.01.2023 was rejected by the order dated 06.01.2023, passed in the case and the court still confirmed that the petitioners were released from the police station on a notice under Section 41A of the Code. In fact, in its order dated 06.01.2023, the court warned the petitioners not to raise the issue again and again.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that, in fact, when the investigation was pending, the notice under Section 41A of the Code was s