Arrest1. Meaning and PurposeThe word arrest has not been defined in the code nor in the IPC nor in any other enactment dealing with criminal offences. Simply speaking, Arrest means apprehension of a person by legal authority resulting in deprivation of his liberty. For instance, when a police officer apprehends a pickpocket he is arresting the pickpocket; but when a dacoit apprehends a person with a view to extract ransom, the dacoit is not arresting that person but wrongfully confining him. Secondly, every compulsion or physical restraint is not arrest but when the restraint is total and deprivation of liberty is complete, that would amount to arrest.Arrest of a person might be necessary under the following circumstances: - (1) For securing attendance of an accused at trial. -When a person is to be tried on the charge of some crime, his attendance at the time of trial becomes necessary. If his attendance is not likely to be ensured by issuing a notice or summons to him, probably' his arrest and detention is the only effective method of securing his presence at the trial.(2) As a preventive or precautionary measure. -If there is imminent danger of the commission of a serious crime (cognizable offence), arrest of the person intending to commit such a crime may become necessary as a preventive measure. There may be other circumstances where it is necessary as a precautionary measure to arrest a habitual offender or an ex-convict, or a person found under suspicious circumstances. (3) For obtaining correct name and address. -Where a person, on being asked by a police officer, refuses to give his name and address, then under certain circumstances, it would be proper on the part of the police to arrest such a person with a view to ascertain his correct name and address.(4) For removing obstruction to police. -Whoever obstructs a police officer in the execution of his duty would be and should be liable to be arrested then and there by such a police officer. This is essential for the effective discharge of police duties.(5) For retaking a person escaped from custody. -A person who has escaped from lawful custody should be arrested forthwith by the police?

2. Decision to arrest We now know the circumstances in which arrest of a person is essential or at least desirable. The determination as to the existence of such circumstances and the consequent decision to arrest should be made fairly having due regard to the liberty of the individual and the interests of the society. Ideally a judicial officer is best suited to decide such issues with a fair measure of reasonableness, impartiality and detachment. Therefore, basically it is for a magistrate to make an arrest decision on the information generally obtained from the police or the complainant. If the magistrate makes a decision to arrest he would issue a warrant of arrest. A warrant of arrest is a written order signed, sealed and issued by a magistrate and addressed to a police officer or some other person specially named and commanding him to arrest the body of the (accused) person named in it.It would also be seen that there might be circumstances where prompt and immediate arrest is needed and there is no time to approach a magistrate and obtain a warrant from him. For instance, in a case where a serious crime has been perpetrated by a dangerous person and there is every chance of the person absconding unless immediately arrested, it would be certainly unwise to insist on the arrest being made only after obtaining a warrant from a magistrate. There may be occasions where preventive action may be necessary in order to avert the danger of sudden outbreak of crime, and immediate arrest of the trouble-maker may be an important step in such preventive action. In those cases, often the arrest decision will have to be made by a person other than a judicial magistrate. In such cases it is the investigating agency which has discretion to effect arrests. In exercising its discretion it may sometimes arrest some individuals whereas their co-accused are not arrested and detained. In such a case the Delhi High Court opined that in a country governed by rule of law the discretion of the investigating agency does not mean whim, fancy or wholly arbitrary exercise of discretion. In all cases where arrests are made by the investigating agency, however, the Code contemplates a judicial scrutiny soon after such arrest. According to the Code, every person arrested without a warrant is required to be produced before the judicial magistrate within 24 hours of his arrest. The police is reported to have been flouting this legal requirement quite often. In such a case the Kerala High Court ruled that whenever a complaint is received by a magistrate that a person has been arrested within his jurisdiction but has not been produced before him within 24 hours or a complaint is made to him that a person is being detained within his jurisdiction beyond 24 hours of his arrest he can and should call upon the police officer concerned to state, whether the allegations are true, and if so, on what and under whose custody he is being so held.If the officer denies the arrest the magistrate can make an inquiry and pass appropriate orders. Further detention shall be illegal unless permitted by a competent judicial magistrate.Thus it would be seen that the Code contemplates two types of arrests: (a) arrest made in pursuance of a warrant issued by a magistrate; and (b) arrest made without such a Warrant but made in accordance with some legal provision permitting such an arrest.

3. Arrest without a warrant: - Powers to arrest without warrant are mainly and widely conferred on the police; but in some circumstances these are conferred on others alsoA: - A police officer may arrest without a warrant: -(Sec 41)Any police officer may without an order from a Magistrate and without a warrant, arrest any person-(a) who has been concerned in any cognizable offence, or against whom a reasonable complaint has been made, or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists, of his having been so concerned; or

(b) who has in his possession without lawful excuse, the burden of proving which excuse shall lie on such person, any implement of house-breaking; or

(c) who has been proclaimed as an offender either under this Code or by order of the State Government;or(d) in whose possession anything is found which may reasonably be suspected to be stolen property and who may reasonably be suspected of having committed an offence with reference to such thing: or(e) who obstructs a police officer while in the execution of his duty, or who has escaped, or attempts to escape, from lawful custody; or(f) who is reasonably suspected of being a deserter from any of the Armed Forces of the Union; or(g) who has been concerned in, or against whom a reasonable complaint has been made, or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists, of his having been concerned in, any act committed at any place out of India which, if committed in India, would have been punishable as an offence, and for which he is, under any law relating to extradition, or otherwise, liable to be apprehended or detained in custody in India; or(h) who, being a released convict, commits a breach of any rule made under sub-section (5) of section 356; or(I) for whose arrest any requisition, whether written or oral, has been received from another police officer, provided that the requisition specifies the person to be arrested and the offence or other cause for which the arrest is to be made and it appears there from that the person might lawfully be arrested without a warrant by the officer who issued the requisition.(2) Any officer in charge of a police station may, in like manner, arrest or cause to be arrested any person, belonging to one or more of the categories of persons specified in section 109 or section 110.

Credible information and a reasonable suspicion: -

Information upon which arrest may be made by a police officer must be based upon definite facts. The police officer must consider over all materials placed before him in support of arrest before taking final decision in this respect. Where a wrong arrest is made by a police officer under a bona fide mistake he will be protected and an illegal arrest does not affect the trial of the case. Similarly where an arrest is made on mere suspicion, it must be reasonable and in such cases investigation should be carried out by the police without delay. Magistrate must also be watchful, for this power is very likely to be abused by the police.(Shahadat Khan, AIR 1965 Trip 27). Whether there are reasonable grounds for suspicion will depend upon the circumstances in each case. If a person is suspected to be in possession of stolen clothes and he fails to answer satisfactorily, it would be a reasonable ground for suspicion justifying his arrest.(Kasturi Lal v. State of U.P, AIR 1965 SC) 1039.) But mere suspicion would not be enough, it must be reasonable. (Faish Mian v. Tripura Administration, (1962) Cr LJ 673.) In State of Maharshtra v. C.C.W. Council of India (2004) Cri.L.J. 14 (S.C.), the High Court by an order prevented the police from arresting a lady without the presence of Lady Constable. And further prohibited the arrest of lady after sunset & before sunrise under any circumstances.

Arrest on refusal to give name and residence. - (Sec 42) (1)When any person who, in the presence of a police officer, has committed or has been accused of committing a non-cognizable offence refuses, on demand of such officer, to give his name and residence or gives a name or residence which such officer has reason to believe to be false, he may be arrested by such officer in order that his name or residence may be ascertained.

(2) When the true name and residence of such person have been ascertained, he shall be released on his executing a bond, with or without sureties, to appear before a Magistrate if so required:

Provided that, if such person is not resident in India, the bond shall be secured by a surety or sureties resident in India.

(3) Should the true name and residence of such person not be ascertained within twenty-four hours from the time of arrest or should he fail to execute the bond, or, if so required, to furnish sufficient sureties, he shall forthwith be forwarded to the nearest Magistrate having jurisdiction.B: - Arrest by Private person and procedure on such arrest. (Sec. 43) (1) Any private person may arrest or cause to be arrested any person who in his presence commits a non-bailable and cognizable offence, or any proclaimed offender, and, without unnecessary delay, shall make over or cause to be made over any person so arrested to a police officer, or, in the absence of a police officer, take such person or cause him to be taken in custody to the nearest police station.

(2) If there is reason to believe that such person comes under the provisions of section 41, a police officer shall re-arrest him.

(3) If there is reason to believe that he has committed a non-cognizable offence, and he refuses on the demand of a police officer to give his name and residence, or gives a name or residence which such officer has reason to believe to be false, he shall be dealt with under the provisions of section 42; but if there is no sufficient reason to believe that he has committed any offence, he shall be at once released.C: - Arrest by Magistrate: - (Sec 44) (1) When any offence is committed in the presence of a Magistrate, whether Executive or Judicial, within his local jurisdiction, he may himself arrest or order any person to arrest the offender, and may thereupon, subject to the provisions herein contained as to bail, commit the offender to custody.

(2) Any Magistrate, whether Executive or Judicial, may at any time arrest or direct the arrest, in his presence, within his local jurisdiction, of any person for whose arrest he is competent at the time and in the circumstances to issue a warrant.

Sub section (1) gives the magistrate the power to arrest a person who has committed an offence in his presence and also to commit him to custody. Under sub section (2) the magistrate has the power to arrest a person who is suspected of having committed an offence but he has no power to commit him to custody in this case. Protection of members of the Armed Forces from arrest. - (Sec. 45) (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sections 41 to 44 (both inclusive), no member of the Armed Forces of the Union shall be arrested for anything done or purported to be done by him in the discharge of his official duties except after obtaining the consent of the Central Government.

(2) The State Government may, by notification, direct that the provisions of sub-section (1) shall apply to such class or category of the members of the Force charged with the maintenance of public order as may be specified therein, wherever they may be serving, and thereupon the provisions of that sub-section shall apply as if for the expression "Central Government" occurring therein, the expression "State Government" were substituted.

4. Arrest how made: - (Sec: - 46)(1) In making an arrest the police officer or other person making the same shall actually touch or confine the body of the person to be arrested, unless there be a submission to the custody by word or action.

(2) If such person forcibly resists the endeavor to arrest him, or attempts to evade the arrest, such police officer or other person may use all means necessary to effect the arrest.

(3) Nothing in this section gives a right to cause the death of a person who is not accused of an offence punishable with death or with imprisonment for life.(4) save in exceptional circumstances, no Women shall be arrested after sunset & before sunrise, and where such exceptional circumstances exist, the women police officer shall, by making a written report, obtain the prior permission of the Judicial Magistrate of the first class within whose local jurisdiction the offence is committed or the arrest is to be made. The word Arrest and Custody are not synonymous. In every arrest there is custody but vice versa is not true. What amounts to arrest is laid down by the legislature in Section 46. Whether the arrest to be made is with a warrant or without the warrant, it is necessary that in making such an arrest the police officer or other person making the same actually touches or confines the body of the person to be arrested unless there be a submission to custody by word or action. (Roshan Beevi v. Jt. Secy. To Government of T.N., 1984 Cri LJ 134 Mad)47.Search of place entered by person sought to be arrested. (1) If any person acting under a warrant of arrest, or any police officer having authority to arrest, has reason to believe that the person to be arrested has entered into, or is within, any place, any person residing in, or being in charge of, such place shall, on demand of such person acting as aforesaid or such police officer, allow him free ingress thereto, and afford all reasonable facilities for a search therein.

(2) If ingress to such place cannot be obtained under sub-section (1), it shall be lawful in any case for a person acting under a warrant and in any case in which a warrant may issue, but cannot be obtained without affording the person to be arrested an opportunity of escape, for a police officer to enter such place and search therein, and in order to effect an entrance into such place, to break open any outer or inner door or window of any house or place, whether that of the person to be arrested or of any other person, if after notification of his authority and purpose, and demand of admittance duly made, he cannot otherwise obtain admittance;

Provided that, if any such place is an apartment in the actual occupancy of a female (not being the person to be arrested) who, according to custom, does not appear in public, such person or police officer shall, before entering such apartment, give notice to such female that she is at liberty to withdraw and shall afford her every reasonable facility for withdrawing, and may then break open the apartment and enter it.

(3) Any police officer or other person authorized to make an arrest may break open any outer or inner door or window of any house or place in order to liberate himself or any other person who, having lawfully entered for the purpose of making an arrest, is detained therein.48.Pursuit of offenders into other jurisdictions.- A police officer may, for the purpose of arresting without warrant any person whom he is authorised to arrest, pursue such person into any place in India.49.No unnecessary restraint.- The Person arrested shall not be subjected to more restraint than is necessary to prevent his escape.55.Procedure when police officer deputes subordinate to arrest without warrant. (1)When any officer in charge of a police station or any police officer making an investigation under Chapter XII requires any officer subordinate to him to arrest without a warrant (otherwise than in his presence) any person who may lawfully be arrested without a warrant, he shall deliver to the officer required to make the arrest an order in writing, specifying the person to be arrested and the offence or other cause for which the arrest is to be made and the officer so required shall, before making the arrest, notify to the person to be arrested the substance of the order and, if so required by such person, shall show him the order.

(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) shall affect the power of a police officer to arrest a person under section 41.60.Power, on escape, to pursue and retake.(1) If a person in lawful custody escapes or is rescued, the person from whose custody he escaped or was rescued may immediately pursue and arrest him in any place in India.

(2) The provisions of section 47 shall apply to arrests under sub-section (1) although the person making any such arrest is not acting under a warrant and is not a police officer having authority to arrest.5. After Arrest Procedures: - 51.Search of arrested person (1) Whenever a person is arrested by a police officer under a warrant which does not provide for the taking of bail, or under a warrant which provides for the taking of bail but the person arrested cannot furnish bail, and

whenever a person is arrested without warrant, or by a private person under a warrant, and cannot legally be admitted to bail, or is unable to furnish bail, the officer making the arrest or, when the arrest is made by a private person, the police officer to whom he makes over the person arrested, may search such person, and place in safe custody all articles, other, than necessary wearing-apparel, found upon him and where any article is seized from the arrested person, a receipt showing the articles taken in possession by the police officer shall be given to such person.

(2) Whenever it is necessary to cause a female to be searched, the search shall be made by another female with strict regard to decency.52.Power to seize offensive weapons. The officer or other person making any arrest under this Code may take from the person arrested any offensive weapons which he has about his person, and shall deliver all weapons so taken to the Court or officer before which or whom the officer or person making the arrest is required by this Code to produce the person arrested.53 Examination of accused by medical practitioner at the request of police officer. - When a person is arrested on a charge of committing an offence of such a nature and alleged to have been committed under such circumstances that there are reasonable grounds for believing that an examination of his person will afford evidence as to the commission of an offence, it shall be lawful for a registered medical practitioner, acting at the request of a police officer not below the rank of sub-inspector, and for any person acting in good faith in his aid and under his direction, to make such an examination of the person arrested as is reasonably necessary in order to ascertain the facts which may afford such evidence, and to use such force as is reasonably necessary for that purpose.

(2) Whenever the person of a female is to be examined under this section, the examination shall be made only by, or under the supervision of, a female registered medical practitioner.

Explanation: - in this section and in sections 53A and 54,(a) "Examination" shall include the examination of blood, blood stains, semen, swabs in case of sexual offences, sputum and sweat, hair samples and finger nail clippings by the use of modern and scientific techniques including DNA profiling and such other tests which the registered medical practitioner thinks necessary in a particular case;(b) "Registered medical practitioner" means a medical practitioner who possess any medical qualification as defined in clause (h) of section 2 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956) and whose name has been entered in a State Medical Register. This section provides that a medical examination will be done at the request of a police officer not below the rank of a Sub-inspector. However superior officers of the police or the court are not barred from exercising the said power if it is necessary for doing justice. If the conditions presented under sub-section (1) are fulfilled it shall be lawful for a registered medical practitioner and for any person acting in good faith in his aid and under his directions to make such examination. According to Andhra Pradesh High Court it is lawful to subject an arrested person to medical examination. Thus we see that sub-section (1) protects a medical practitioner for lawful medical examination, of the person accused of committing an offence, made by him at the request of a police officer. As the medical examination, of the accused under Section 53 is part and parcel of the process of investigation, the police could get the accused medically examined even after the framing of the charge by the court by exercising their powers of further investigation under Section 173 (8). It was held in State of Maharashtra v. Dyanaba Bhikoba Dagade 1979 Cr L J 277(Bom), that a Magistrate has no authority under Section 53 to pass an order allowing a medical practitioner to extract blood of the accused. Investigation is a task of the police and such functions must be performed by them alone. It was held in Anil A. Lokhande v. State of Maharashtra (1981 Cr L J 125(SC)) that examination of person of the accused cannot be confined only to external examination of his body but many a times it may become necessary to make examination of some organs inside the body for the purpose of collecting evidence. In that case examination may include taking of blood from the accused. 53A. Examination of person accused of rape by medical practitioner. -(l) When a person is arrested on a charge of committing an offence of rape or an attempt to commit rape and there are reasonable grounds for believing that an examination of this person will afford evidence as to the commission of such offence. It shall be lawful for a registered medical practitioner employed in a hospital run by the Government or by a local authority and in the absence of such a practitioner within the radius of sixteen kilometers from the place where the offence has been committed by any other registered medical practitioner, acting at the request of a police officer not below the rank of a sub-inspector and for any person acting in good faith in his aid and under his direction to make such an examination of the arrested person and to use such force as is reasonably necessary for that purpose.(2) The registered medical practitioner conducting such examination shall without delay examine such person and prepare a report of his examination giving the following particulars namely : (i) the name and address of the accused and of the person by whom he was brought. (ii) the age of the accused. (iii) marks of injury if any on the person of the accused. (iv) the description of material taken from the person of the accused for DNA profiling and (v) other material particulars in reasonable detail.(3) The report shall state precisely the reasons for each conclusion arrived at.(4) The exact time of commencement and completion of the examination shall also be noted in the report.(5) The registered medical practitioner shall without delay, forward the report of the investigating officer who shall forward it to the Magistrate referred to in section 173 as part of the documents referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (5) of that section. 58. Police to report apprehensions. - Officers in charge of police stations shall report to the District Magistrate, or, if he so directs, to the Sub-divisional Magistrate, the cases of all persons arrested without warrant, within the limits of their respective stations, whether such persons have been admitted to bail or otherwise.

59. Discharge of person apprehended. - No person who has been arrested by a police officer shall be discharged except on his own bond, or on bail, or under the special order of a Magistrate. 6. Rights of arrested Person: - 50.Person arrested to be informed of grounds of arrest and of right to bail.- (1)Every police officer or other person arresting any person without warrant shall forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest.

(2) Where a police officer arrests without warrant any person other than a person accused of a non-bailable offence, he shall inform the person arrested that he is entitled to be released on bail and that he may arrange for sureties on his behalf.50A. Obligation of person making arrest to inform about the arrest, etc., to a nominated person.-(l) Every police officer or other person making any arrest under this Code shall forthwith give the information regarding such arrest and place where the arrested person is being held to any, of his friends, relatives or such other persons as may be disclosed or nominated by the arrested person for the purpose of giving such information. .(2) The police officer shall inform the arrested person of his rights under sub section (1) as soon as he is brought to the police station.(3) An entry of the fact as to who has been informed of the arrest of such person shall be made in a book to be kept in the police station in such form as may be prescribed in this behalf by the State Government.(4) It shall be the duty of the Magistrate before whom such arrested person is produced, to satisfy himself that the requirements of sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) have been complied with in respect of such arrested person.The provisions of this section are mandatory. Where a person is arrested without any warrant, he should be immediately informed of the particulars of the offence and grounds of his arrest and where the offence is a bailable one, of his right to be released on bail. That is an arrest without warrant can be justified only if it is an arrest on a charge made known to the person arrested. This section confers a valuable right and non-compliance with it amounts to disregard of the procedure established by law. The allegation that the grounds of arrest or its particulars as would be, enough to enable him to file a writ petition of habeas corpus were not given, has to be proved by the person making such allegations. Making known to the accused grounds of his arrest is a constitutional requirement and failure to comply with this requirement renders the arrest illegal.In Raj Kumari v. S.H.O. Noida, (2004) Cri.L.J. 9 (S.C). the petitioner a leader of workers who had resorted to strike and violence was arrested in night after F.LR. of incident was lodged. The arrest was made by the police after investigation which showed that she had led the mob. The petitioner complained that she was arrested in the night in violation of the Supreme Court's decision in Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P., and D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, the petitioner supported her allegation on affidavit but affidavit of her relatives were not filed. She also complained that police officers who arrested her did not bear name plates and no memo of arrest was prepared. The allegation that she was arrested in night was denied by police by filing affidavit. It was held that the affidavit of the petitioner was the only supportive evidence on record. There was no other corroborative material or affidavit of her relatives. Therefore, the plea of petitioner that she was arrested at night was not tenable, more so because the plea of violation of Supreme Court decision was not raised in her bail application moved on same day and with legal assistance. Therefore, the allegation of petitioner was not accepted and the petition to initiate action against police was held liable to be set aside. 50A. Obligation of person making arrest to inform about the arrest, etc. to a nominated person. - (1) Every police officer or other person making any arrest under this Code shall forthwith give the information regarding such arrest and place where the arrested person is being held to any of his friends. relatives or such other persons as may be disclosed or nominated by the arrested person for the purpose of giving such information.(2) The police officer shall inform the arrested persorl of his rights under sub-section (1) as soon as he is brought to the police station.(3) An entry of the fact as to who has been informed of the arrest of such person shall be made in. a book to be kept in the police station in such form as may be prescribed in this behalf by the State Government. (4) It shall be the duty of the Magistrate before whom such arrested person is produced, to satisfy himself that the requirements of sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) have been complied with in respect of such arrested person. 54.Examination of arrested person by medical practitioner at the request of the arrested person.-When a person who is arrested, whether on a charge or otherwise, alleges, at the time when he is produced before a Magistrate or at any time during the period of his detention in custody that the examination of his body will afford evidence which will disprove the commission by him of any offence or which will establish the commission by any other person of any offence against his body, the Magistrate shall, if requested by the arrested person so to do direct the examination of the body of such person by a registered medical practitioner unless the Magistrate considers that the request is made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice.This section confers on the arrested person the right to have his medical examination done. It was held in V.J. Vaghela v. Kantibhai Jethabhai, (1985 Cr.L.J. 974 (Guj) that the Magistrate owes a duty to inform the arrested person about his right to get himself examined in case he has complaints of physical torture or maltreatment in police custody. The Supreme Court has cautioned the lower Courts not to adapt a casual approach to custodial torture (Sheela Barse v. state of Maharashtra, 1983 Cr.LJ 642 SC). In case the Magistrate considers the test of the accused to-be vexatious or for defeating the ends of justice, he may refuse it. It has been held in Mukesh Kumar v. State(1990 Cr LJ 1923 (Delhi), that the procedure adopted by the Magistrate to examine the body of the accused himself and then dismissing the application with his observation that they were seen in normal posture was wholly unwarranted and erroneous. 54A. Identification of person arrested. -Where a person is arrested on a charge of committing an offence and his identification by any other person or persons is considered necessary for the purpose of investigation of such offence the Court, having jurisdiction, may on the request of the officer. in charge of a police station, direct the person so arrested to subject himself to identification by any person or persons in such manner as the Court may deem fit.56.Person arrested to be taken before Magistrate or officer in charge of police station.- A police officer making an arrest without warrant shall, without unnecessary delay and subject to the provisions herein contained as to bail, take or send the person arrested before a Magistrate having jurisdiction in the case, or before the officer in charge of a police station.57.Person arrested not to be detained more than twenty-four hours.- No police officer shall detail in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the absence of a special order of a Magistrate under section 167, exceed twenty-four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate's Court.Right to consult a legal practitioner: - both the Constitution & the Provisions of the Code recognize the right of every arrested person to consult a legal Practitioner of his choice. The right begins from the moment of arrest.(S 303 and Article 22(1) of the constitution of India.Right of an arrested indigent person to free legal aid and to be informed about it. In Khatri (II) v. State of Bihar (1981) 1 SCC 627, the Supreme Court has held that the State is under a constitutional Mandate (implicit in Article 21) to provide free legal aid to an indigent accused person. Apart from the above-mentioned rules the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu V. State Of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416; 1997 SCC (Cri) 92, issued the following instructions: - (1) The police personnel carrying out the arrest and handling the interrogation of the arrestee should bear accurate, visible and clear identification and name tags with their designations. The particulars of all such police personnel who handle interrogation of the arrestee must be recorded in a register.(2) That the police officer carrying out the arrest of the arrestee shall prepare a memo of arrest at the time of arrest and such memo shall be attested by at least one witness, who may either be a member of the family of the arrestee or a respectable person of the locality from where the arrest is made. It shall also be countersigned by the arrestee and shall contain the time and date of arrest.(3) The time, place of arrest and venue of custody of an arrestee must be notified by the police where the next friend or relative of the arrestee lives outside the district or town through the Legal Aid Organisation in the district and the Police Station of the area concerned telegraphically within a period of 8 to 12 hours after the arrest.(4) The arrestee should, where he so requests, be also examined at the time of his arrest and major and minor injuries, if any present on his/her body must be recorded at that time. The "Inspection Memo" must be signed both by the arrestee and the police officer affecting the arrest and its copy provided to the arrestee.(5) The arrestee should be subjected to medical examination by a trained doctor every 48 hours during his detention in custody by a doctor on the panel of approved doctors appointed by the Director, Health Services of the State or Union Territory concerned. The Director, Health Services should prepare such a panel for all Tehsils and districts as well.(6) Copies of all the documents including the memo of arrest referred to above should be sent to the Illaqa Magistrate for his record.(7) The arrestee may be permitted to meet his lawyer during interrogation, though not throughout interrogation.(8) A Police Control Room should be provided at all districts and State Headquarters, where information regarding the arrest and the place of custody of the arrestee shall be communicated by the officer causing the arrest, within 12 hours of effecting the arrest and at the Police Control Room it should be displayed on a conspicuous Notice Board.Failure to comply with the requirements herein above-mentioned shall apart from rendering the official concerned liable for departmental action, also render him liable to be punished for contempt of court and the proceedings for contempt of court may be instituted in any High Court of the country having territorial jurisdiction over the matter.The right to compensation for the victims of unlawful arrest and detention has been recognised by the Supreme Court in Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa. (1997 SCC (Cri) 434)It is to be noted that these instructions are applicable to authorities like Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Directorate of Enforcement, C.B.I., C.LB., C.I.S.F., etc. which have the power to effect arrest and detain persons for interrogation.Consequences of non-compliance with the provisions relating to arrest: - (1) A trial will not be void simply because the provisions relating to arrest have not been fully complied with.(2) Though the illegality or irregularity in making an arrest would not vitiate the trial of the arrested person, it would be quite material if such a person is prosecuted on a charge of resistance to or escape from lawful custody.(3) If the arrest is illegal, the person who is being so arrested can exercise the right of private defence in accordance with, and subject to, the provisions contained in Sections 96 to 106 of the IPC.(4) If the public servant having authority to make arrests, knowingly exercises that authority in contravention of law and effects an illegal arrest, he can be prosecuted for an offence under Section 220 of the IPC. Apart from this special provision, any person who illegally arrests another is punishable under Section 342 of the IPC for wrongful confinement.(5) If the arrest is illegal, it is a tort of false imprisonment, and the arrested person is entitled to claim damages from the person who made such an arrest. In Muhammad Yusuf v. Queen Empress, (1897) 24 IA 137 (PC) Halsbury L.C. observed , it may well be that the procedure taken was irregular and improper and brought a person wrongfully within the jurisdiction. But if he is there and if he has committed an offence, whatever else may be said about it, it is no answer to the offence committed within the jurisdiction that he has been brought irregularly within the jurisdiction.It has been categorically ruled by the Supreme Court in Nilabati Behera (1993) 2 SCC 746 that victims of unlawful arrest and detention have right to compensation.It may be mentioned here that the provisions relating to arrest cannot be bypassed by alleging that there was no arrest but only informal detention. Informal detention or restraint of any kind by the police is not authorized by law.SafeguardsRecently, in Siddharam v. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694 the Supreme Court, by way of illustrative cases made the following suggestions, which may be helpful before an accused is arrested.(1) Direct the accused to joint the investigation and only when the accused does not cooperate with the investigating agency, then only the accused be arrested.(2) Seize either the passport or such other related documents, such as, the title deeds of properties or the fixed deposit receipts/share certificates of the accused.(3) Direct the accused to execute bonds.4) The accused may be directed to furnish sureties of a number of persons which according to the prosecution are necessary in view of the facts of the particular case.(5) The accused be directed to furnish undertaking that he would not visit the place where the witnesses reside so that the possibility of tampering of evidence or otherwise influencing the course of justice can be avoided.(6) Bank accounts be frozen for small duration during the investigation.

IMMUNITY OF MEMBERS OF JUDICIAL SERVICEThough there is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure granting immunity or protection from arrest to the members of judicial service, the leading decision of the Supreme Court in Delhi Judicial Service Association v. State of Gujarat, (AIR 1991 SC 2176) lays down certain guidelines to be 'followed:In that case, a Chief Judicial Magistrate of Nadiad in Gujarat was humiliated, arrested, assaulted, handcuffed and tied with a thick rope around his arms and body on flimsy charges. In that condition, he was taken to the public exhibiting to the members of public that the police had the power and privilege to apprehend and deal with a Chief Judicial Magistrate to its sweet will. Treating the assault on an individual judicial officer as an onslaught on judicial institution, disapproving and strongly condemning it and punishing the erring police officers under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the Supreme Court considered it necessary to lay down guidelines to be followed in the case of arrest and detention of a Judicial Officer. Holding the guidelines as "minimum safeguards" and not treating them exhaustive, SINGH, J. (as he then was) stated:(i) If a Judicial Officer is to be arrested for some offence, it should be done under intimation to the District Judge or the High Court as the case may be.(ii) If facts and circumstances necessitate the immediate arrest of a Judicial Officer of the subordinate judiciary, technical or formal arrest may be effected.(iii) The fact of such arrest should be immediately communicated to the District and Sessions Judge of the concerned District and the Chief Justice of the High Court. (iv) The Judicial Officer so arrested shall not be taken to a police station, without the prior order or directions of the District and Sessions Judge of the concerned District, if available.(v) Immediate facilities shall be provided to the Judicial Officer for communication with his family members, legal advisers and Judicial Officers, including the District and Sessions Judge.(vi) No statement of a Judicial Officer who is under arrest be recorded nor any panchnama be drawn up nor any medical tests be conducted except in the presence of the Legal Adviser of the Judicial Officer concerned or another Judicial Officer of equal or higher rank, if available. (vii) There should be no handcuffing of a Judicial Officer. If, however, violent resistance to arrest is offered or there is imminent need to effect physical arrest in order to avert danger to life and limb, the person resisting arrest may be overpowered and handcuffed. In such case, immediate report shall be made to the District and Sessions Judge concerned and also to the Chief Justice of the High Court. But the burden would be on the police to establish the necessity for effecting physical arrest and handcuffing the Judicial Officer and if it be established that the physical arrest and handcuffing of the Judicial Officer was unjustified, the Police Officers causing or responsible for such arrest and handcuffing would be guilty of misconduct and would also be personally liable for compensation and/or damages as may be summarily determined by the High Court.The Apex Court added:"The above guidelines are not exhaustive but these are minimum safeguards which must be observed in case of arrest of judicial officer.