Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 84
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Dharmesh Sharma, J
VIKAS CHAWLA @ VICKY – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI – Respondent
CRL.M.C. 4845/2024
ARUN KHATRI
The court examined the legal requirements for supplying grounds of arrest to the accused under Sections 41, 50, and 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the scope of interim relief in sensitive cases involving forged travel documents.
Headnote:
Arrest - Criminal Procedure - Sections 41, 50, 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The court examined the legal requirements for supplying grounds of arrest to the accused and the scope of interim relief in sensitive cases involving forged travel documents.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves the arrest of a petitioner/accused on charges of offenses under Sections 467/474/477 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The state challenged the previous order of the vacation judge, which held that the grounds of arrest were insufficient and directed no coercive action against the petitioner/accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the sensitive nature of the case involving forged travel documents and foreign nationals. The court found it appropriate to place the matter before the learned roster bench for deeper examination, while continuing the interim relief granted earlier.
Issues: Whether the grounds of arrest were duly supplied to the accused within the legal parameters, and whether the interim relief granted earlier should be continued.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgments in Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ram Kishor Arora v. Directorate of Enforcement to examine the legal requirements for supplying grounds of arrest and the scope of interim relief in sensitive cases.
Final Decision: The matter is to be placed before the learned roster bench for consideration on 03.07.2024, and the interim relief granted earlier shall continue till then.
ORDER
1. At the outset, Mr Sanjay Jain, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the State has alluded and challenged the previous order dated 14.06.2024 passed by the learned Vacation Judge, whereby holding that grounds of arrest mentioned in the arrest memo were not sufficient in terms of judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi)1; and has also assailed the interim direction that no coercive process shall be taken against the petitioner/accused.
2. Mr. Jain, learned ASG for the State has taken this Court through the decision in the case of Prabir Purkayastha (supra) and it is 1 2024 SCC OnLine SC 934 vehemently urged that there was no violation for supplying grounds of arrest inasmuch as the petitioner/accused was arrested on 20.03.2024 at 11.30 p.m. and the grounds of arrest were duly supplied to him within 24 hours. Additionally it is argued that the earlier order dated 14.06.2024 insofar as it has directed the State not to initiate coercive process against the petitioner/accused, cannot be sustained and continued since in the interregnum on further investigation, the petitioner/accused, appears to have committed offences punishable under Sections 467/474/477 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. Mr. Jain, learned ASG has also relied on decision in the case of Ram Kishor Arora v. Directorate of Enforcement2.
4. Per contra, Mr. Anurag Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused has alluded to the observations made by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-01, New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi [“MM”] whereby it was categorically observed that grounds of arrest had not been supplied to the accused in terms of the well established legal parameters.
5. During the course of arguments this Court has been taken through the observations made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-07, New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi dated 06.06.2024 whereby the order passed by the learned MM dated 21.06.2024 has been set-aside.
6. Unhesitatingly, the plea advanced by the learned ASG appearing for the State that the case is of sensitive in nature inasmuch as forged travel documents including passport were made available to a foreign national, as in this case to an Afgan national, at the same time the challenge is in the nature of review of order dated 14.06.2024. Hence, it would be appropriate that the matter be kept for consideration and deeper examination by the learned Roster Bench.
7. Hence, the matter be placed before the learned Roster Bench for consideration on 03.07.2024. Till then, the interim relief granted vide order dated 14.06.2024 shall continue.
