Police/Investigation Agencies Must Scrupulously Adhere To All Constitutional/Statutory Safeguards & SC Guidelines While Arresting A Person: Supreme Court
|The Supreme Court issued a general direction to the police/investigation agencies to scrupulously adhere to all Constitutional and statutory safeguards and the additional guidelines laid down by it when a person is arrested by them and/or remanded to their custody.
The court said that the high-handed acts committed by persons in power against an ordinary citizen in a non-bargaining position brings shame to the entire justice delivery system.
The Court strongly denounced the high-handed action of the police officer who abused his official position by physically assaulting and verbally abusing the appellant in police custody. The Court found the police officer to have committed “excesses against the appellant.”
Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah observed, “It is sad that even today, this Court is forced to restate the principles and directions in D K Basu..As such, there will be a general direction to the police forces in all States and Union Territories as also all agencies endowed with the power of arrest and custody to scrupulously adhere to all Constitutional and statutory safeguards and the additional guidelines laid down by this Court when a person is arrested by them and/or remanded to their custody"
AOR Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh represented the appellant, while AOR Aaditya Aniruddha Pande appeared for the respondents.
The appellant was arrested on the charges of theft. While he was in police custody, the appellant allegedly was taken out of the lock-up by the police officer in handcuffs and was paraded half-naked with a garland of footwear around his neck and was “said to have been verbally abused with reference to his caste as also physically assaulted.”
The appellant sought departmental inquiry and criminal prosecution against the police officer. The Special Inspector General of Police punished the police officer with a "strict warning.” The appellant then approached the High Court seeking departmental inquiry, and criminal proceedings against the officer along with compensation. The High Court partly allowed the petition, awarding compensation but declined to initiate criminal action under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The Court indicated that in such matters, “the Courts need to take a very strict view. A zero-tolerance approach towards such high-handed acts needs to be adopted as such acts, committed by persons in power against an ordinary citizen, who is in a non-bargaining position, bring shame to the entire justice delivery system.”
Considering that the police officer had superannuated and had paid Rupees One Lakh and since the appellant had accepted the said compensation, the Court held that “the matter now requires to be finally given a quietus.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal.
Cause Title: Somnath v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 232)
Appearance:
Appellant: AOR Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh; Advocates Nishant Sharma and Akshay Subhash Jagtap
Respondents: AOR Aaditya Aniruddha Pande and Atul Babasaheb Dakh; Advocates Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Bharat Bagla, Sourav Singh, Aditya Krishna, Preet S. Phanse, Adarsh Dubey, Mahesh Tiwari and Bitu Kumar Singh