Arnesh Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr 

Bench- Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, Pinaki Chandra Ghose 

Arnesh Kumar v. the State of Bihar is a landmark judgment, which was pronounced by the Apex Court as it imposed further checks and balances on the powers of the police before an arrest under section 498-A of Cr.P.C can be done which deals with dowry cases. 

Facts of the case – 

The petitioner was arrested in a case under Section 498-A of IPC, 1860 and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. After an allegation was made by the wife against the appellant, that her in-laws were demanding dowry and when this fact was brought to the appellants notice, he supported his mother and threatened to marry another woman. Denying these allegations, the appellant preferred an application for anticipatory bail but he failed. Later, he filed a special leave petition and his leave was granted by the supreme court of India. 

ISSUE- whether the petitioner should be granted an anticipatory bail or not ? 

JUDGEMENT- 

The court held that, no arrests should be made on the basis of the offence being non-bailable and cognizable, Proper facts and reasons should be presented before a Magistrate by the officer affecting the arrest within 24 hours of the arrest. The Magistrate in turn is to be satisfied that condition precedent for arrest under Section 41 CrPc. It was further held that, the decision not to arrest an accused must also be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case.  

The court said that to ensure that police officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and magistrates do not authorize the detention casually and mechanically, specific directions are to be followed. These directions included instructions to police officers not to automatically arrest when a case is registered under offences where the maximum punishment is seven years or less but to be satisfied first with the need to arrest under Section 41 CrPC. 

Due to the misuse of section 498A of IPC, it was necessary for the supreme court to lay certain guidelines for the implementation of these laws. The court noted that there had been an increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years, including pendency before courts. It also dealt with a larger issue of arrest noting that it brings ‘humiliation, curtails freedom and casts scars forever’. Therefore, in this case, the appellant was granted bail and the appeal was allowed.

Aishwarya Says:

I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.

If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.

Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter  Youtube and Instagram.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com

We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.