Re-arrest in Arms Act case despite procedural lapse is legal, rules Delhi HC
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma delivered the ruling while dismissing a batch of petitions filed by several accused persons, who had challenged their re-arrest in an Arms Act case being investigated by Delhi Police's special cell. They had also assailed a trial court order which had upheld the legality of the subsequent arrest.
'It would essentially mean that a serious offender may escape the process of law solely on account of a procedural lapse committed by the investigating agency, even if sufficient material exists justifying his arrest,' the court observed.
The petitioners had argued that once the trial court had held their initial arrest invalid, any re-arrest under the same FIR could not be legally sustained. They also asserted that fresh material did not exist to justify their re-arrest and that statutory safeguards had still not been followed.
Rejecting these contentions, the court noted that at the time of re-arrest, detailed arrest grounds were furnished to each of the accused, outlining their alleged roles in the organised crime syndicate.
'Therefore, at the time of re-arrest, the mandatory requirements of law, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, were prima facie complied with. Thus, this court is of the opinion that the defect which had vitiated the initial arrest was not repeated during the re-arrest,' the bench held. It added that there is no express provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, or the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which bars such a re-arrest.
'To hold otherwise would amount to laying down a precedent which, in the long run, may prove perilous to the administration of criminal justice. Should the procedural lapse committed by one officer, however serious, be allowed to permanently shield the accused from arrest, even after the defect has been remedied? The answer must be negative,' the court said.
The court said that allowing such an argument would effectively grant blanket immunity to accused persons from being arrested in future, even in serious offences, merely because of a previous technical defect.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Delhi Police faces a new reality on licences
The Licensing Branch of the Delhi Police is now left with fewer responsibilities after the Delhi government eliminated the requirement of police clearance for eight key trades in the Capital. The unit, which traces its origins to the 1860s—when the British enforced the Serais Act—still plays a key role in important sectors, despite having its responsibilities diminished. Since 2019, the police received over 52,000 applications from restaurants, hotels and other establishments, but rejected 36,900 of them, reflecting a rejection rate of over 70%. (Representative photo) On June 23, Delhi chief minister Rekha Gupta announced a regulatory overhaul, revoking Delhi Police's powers to issue a no-objection certificate for seven trade categories: amusement parks, hotels/guest houses/lodges, restaurants, swimming pools, discotheques, video game parlours and auditoriums. On July 1, the Delhi Police removed these services from its website. Senior police officers confirmed that the move, at the lieutenant governor's order, has now been implemented. The website now only has the categories of arms, explosives, cinema and press licence. Last Friday, the licensing of cinema halls and theatres, earlier governed under the Cinematograph Act, 1952, by the Delhi Police, will now fall under the purview of a district-level committee chaired by the district magistrate (DM) or deputy commissioner (DC) concerned. Police have been asked to disengage from issuing licences under the Cinematograph Act. Vikram Singh, former DGP of Uttar Pradesh, said the move has diminished the authority of the Delhi Police. 'Maybe the government should recall its orders. It's not just a question of power or authority; it's a question of gaining more contact, more channels of information, and relevant and reliable information through hotels, restaurants, discos, parks, and other venues frequented by anti-national elements and criminals/gangsters. If the police have some control over these places, it would be in the interest of law and order,' he said. Evolution, through the years Senior Delhi Police officers said licensing has been a key part of policing in Delhi since the 1860s. In 1867, the British introduced the Serais Act, which gave powers to district magistrates to register and inspect all new and old 'Sarais' (inns or establishments) in the city and ensure maintenance by their proprietors and owners. A copy of the act, accessed by HT, states that keepers of Sarais, housing persons and cattle, must inform the police in case of death, infection or contagion at the establishment. A retired police officer who once served as the Licensing Branch's head, told HT: 'We don't have many records from the 1860s, as it was the time when police started lodging FIRs. There was no licensing office or branch. Only a few police constables would help DM and civic authorities inspect lodges.' A major overhaul in the Licensing Branch was made post-Independence, in the 1950s, with the passage of the Arms Act, 1959, and the Cinematograph Act, 1952. Both these acts necessitated the police to oversee trade practices related to arms, ammunition and films. In 1966-67, the Khosla Commission report (set up to oversee problems of policemen) helped reorganise Delhi Police, and eventually led to the passage of the Delhi Police Act in 1978. It brought certain powers, which were earlier with the DM, under the remit of the commissioner of police. Chapter 4 of the Delhi Police Act mentioned 'power to make regulations for regulating traffic and for preservation of order in public places…' as a provision for the Delhi Police, with regards to 'licensing or controlling places of public amusement or public entertainment'. After 1978, the Delhi Police was 'actively' called to inspect lodges, hotels, inns and other trade establishments. The officer cited above said, 'The change emerged from a need for security and law and order concerns. The change started with 10-20 officials, usually low-ranking.' In 1978, a separate department and office were set up in south Delhi's Defence Colony, headed by a joint commissioner or additional commissioner of police. Starting with 10-20 staffers in the 1970s, the present office has more than 150 staffers, comprising officials of ranks of special commissioner, joint commissioner, deputy commissioner and assistant commissioners, among other police officers. Licensing powers were extended to amusement parks, eateries, auditoriums, cinema houses, public theatres and any event venues. Until recently, three ACPs overlooked the inspection and regulation of licences provided to eateries, hotels/motels and amusement parks. The department is now planning to change the roles of its senior officers to reflect the change in their responsibilities. Stringent processing According to Delhi Police data accessed by HT, the Licensing Branch has the highest rejection rate for trade licences among other departments (MCD, DFS, DPCC…). Since 2019, the police received over 52,000 applications from restaurants, hotels and other establishments, but rejected 36,900 of them, reflecting a rejection rate of over 70%. Police said most of the applicants reapplied within three months and were able to secure approvals by fixing deficiencies, such as fixing ventilation, windows, exit spaces, fire equipment, lighting, and electrical issues. In contrast, the Delhi Fire Services had a rejection rate of 11.5% in the same period, the Delhi Pollution Control Committee had a rejection rate of 35.3% and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi 50%. A senior police officer currently deployed with the Licensing Branch said, 'We rejected applications only after inspections. Police inspections are mandatory to see if the establishment has been involved in illegal activities. We check if the establishment is housing criminal/anti-social elements, providing illegal alcohol, facilitating drug activities, or has incorrect rental or property documents. These metrics are also important as during the Independence and Republic Day (security preparations).' Police said the upcoming Independence Day would be the first time in 50 years that the Delhi Police did not have registers of all licensed and offending trade establishments in the city. In the 2005-10 period, police said the Licensing Branch was also overseeing CCTV installation at all establishments, especially the ones operating at night. 'This ensured women's safety and the safety of staff and others. We also check health and liquor licences since they are important for any hotel or eatery. Our licensing teams would also check if each establishment had a DVR storage of 30 days at least…' the second officer said.
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
Nimisha Priya case: Yemen cancels death sentence of Indian nurse, claims Grand Mufti's office
In a big relief for Nimisha Priya, the Indian nurse who was facing the death penalty in Yemen, her death sentence has now been officially cancelled. This good news was shared by the office of Indian Grand Mufti Kanthapuram AP Abubakker Musliyar. 'The death sentence of Nimisha Priya, which was previously suspended, has now been completely cancelled,' read a statement from the Grand Mufti's office. This comes after her execution, which was originally scheduled to happen on July 16, was halted temporarily just a day earlier, after Grand Mufti AP Abubakker Muslaiyar intervened and requested Yemeni authorities to reconsider. This decision was reportedly made during a high-level meeting in Yemen's capital, Sanaa. India's Attorney General R Venkataramani, speaking in the Supreme Court, said that efforts are ongoing to bring Nimisha back home safely. The court, which is hearing a request for stronger diplomatic steps, has scheduled the next hearing for August 14. What is Nimisha Priya's issue? Nimisha Priya, a 37-year-old trained nurse from Kerala, went to Yemen in search of work. In 2015, she teamed up with a local man, Talal Abdo Mahdi, to start a clinic, since foreigners aren't allowed to own businesses there on their own. Mahdi reportedly misused a wedding photo taken during a visit to India to falsely claim he was married to Nimisha. He took control of the clinic and began forcing her to hand over her monthly earnings. According to her family, he abused her in many ways, including physical torture, drugging her, and taking her passport so she couldn't leave Yemen. When Nimisha turned to the police for help, she was briefly jailed instead of being protected. Desperate to escape, she allegedly tried to sedate Mahdi to get her passport back. But the dose turned out to be too strong, and Mahdi died leading to her arrest and a murder conviction.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
2019 Jamia violence: Delhi HC seeks police's response
The Delhi High Court on Monday sought a response from the Delhi Police on a petition filed by student activist Asif Iqbal Tanha, challenging a court's order that framed charges against him in the 2019 Jamia violence case. The case stems from the 2019-2020 protests at Jamia Millia Islamia and Shaheen Bagh that erupted after the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) was passed in Parliament on December 11, 2019. Police personnel outside Jamia Millia Islamia during the protests in 2019-20. (PTI) On March 7, additional sessions judge Vishal Singh, hearing the case at Saket Court, framed charges against Tanha under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 109 (abetment), 120B (criminal conspiracy), 143, 147, 148, 149 (unlawful assembly and rioting), 186, 353, 332, 333 (obstructing and assaulting public servants), 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide), 427, 435 (mischief by fire), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), and 341 (wrongful restraint). He was also charged under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. ASJ Singh noted that Tanha was named in the FIR as one of the individuals present at the scene of violence and allegedly leading the mob — a claim purportedly corroborated by his mobile number's call detail records (CDR) and location data. Besides Tanha, the trial court also framed charges against, Sharjeel Imam, a former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) scholar, noting that he was not only an instigator but also one of the kingpins behind the larger conspiracy to incite violence during the 2019 anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Delhi. On Monday, justice Sanjeev Narula sought Delhi Police's response and listed the matter for further hearing on October 30, along with Sharjeel Imam's petition challenging the same order. In his petition, argued by advocate Siddharth Satija, Tanha has contended that the trial court's order was passed without proper application of mind or appreciation of the evidence on record. Apart from the 2019 Jamia violence case, Tanha is also an accused in the larger conspiracy case related to the 2020 Delhi riots. In 2021, the Delhi High Court granted him bail—along with fellow activists Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita—citing delays in the trial.
