Supreme Court directs High Courts, State DGPs to ensure compliance with Arnesh Kumar guidelines to avoid unnecessary arrests

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered the issue of circulars, notifications and instructions to ensure that police authorities and criminal courts strictly adhere to the guidelines on arrest laid down in the 2014 Arnesh Kumar case. [Md. Asfak Alam v. State of Jharkhand and Another]..In the 2014 Arnesh Kumar case, the Supreme Court had take note of the misuse of Section 498A (cruelty to woman) of the Indian Penal Code, especially in connection with dowry demands. In view of how this law is misused, the Court had issued guidelines to ensure that arrests are avoided unless necessary.A division bench of Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar has now ordered High Courts to frame the directions issued in the Arnesh Kumar case in the form of notifications and guidelines to be followed by Sessions Courts and other criminal courts.Likewise, the Directors General of Police in all States were directed to ensure strict compliance with such guidelines.The issue of such directives, guidelines and departmental circulars are to be issued within eight weeks, the Court added.Further, the concerned authorities are to file an affidavit of compliance before the Supreme Court in ten weeks’ time, the bench added..The Court issued these directions while granting bail to a man accused of various offences in a matrimonial dispute, including dowry harassment, cruelty and criminal intimidation.The bench found that the High Court, in this case, had mechanically rejected an anticipatory bail plea moved by the accused and, instead, ordered the accused to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail.After the accused moved an appeal before the Supreme Court, the top court reiterated that bail should ordinarily be granted, considering an individual's right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The bench acknowledged that in serious cases, the Court may use its discretion to grant or reject bail depending on the gravity of the alleged offence, the ability of the accused to influence the investigation, the likelihood of the accused absconding etc.However, in the present case, the Court found that the accused had cooperated with the investigation and that were no startling features or elements to disentitle the accused from being granted pre-arrest bail.The Supreme Court further opined that since the chargesheet was also filed, the High Court ought to have granted bail as a matter of course."However, the court did not do so but mechanically rejected and, virtually, to rub salt in the wound directed the appellant to surrender and seek regular bail before the Trial Court. Therefore, in the opinion of this court, the High Court fell into error in adopting such a casual approach,” the Supreme Court found.Therefore, the bench set aside the order of the High Court and allowed the bail plea..[Read Judgment]