INTRODUCTION

Arrest is a very important process in the code as it ensures the presence of the accused at the
trial. Section 41 to 60 of the CRPC lays down the provisions relating to Arrest of Persons.
This section empowers a police officer to arrest a person and not a private person.
MEANING:
“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”. The expression “Arrest”
literally means “Deprivation of personal liberty by legal authority. An arrest implies the
actual seizure or touching of the person with a view to keep him in detention.
Cognizable Offence – According to Section 2 (c) “cognizable offence” means an offence for
which, and “cognizable case” means a case in which, a police officer may arrest without
warrant. Non- cognizable offence - According to Section 2(l) “non- cognizable offence”
means an offence for which, and “non- cognizable case” means a case in which, a police
officer has no authority to arrest without warrant.
Issue of process- According to section 204 (1) in summons case, summons shall be issued
and in warrant case either summons or warrant may be issued. There are three exceptional
cases mentioned under section 87 when in summons case warrant may be issued. In these
cases warrant may be issued either in lieu of or in addition to summons. These are –
(1) If, before the issue of summons, the Court sees reason to believe that the person has
absconded or will not obey the summons.
(2) If, after the issue of the summons but before the time fixed for his appearance the Court
sees reason to believe that the person has absconded or will not obey the summons.
(3) If the person fails to appear on the fixed day for appearance even after receiving
summons and he did not provide reasonable grounds for non-appearance.

TYPES OF ARREST:

1. Arrest with warrant

2. Arrest without warrant

1. ARREST WITH WARRANT : means which may be issued by a Magistrate after taking
cognizance of the offence whether cognizable or non-cognizable . If the offence is
cognizable, the police can arrest without warrant. The purpose of warrant is to cause the
accused to appear before the court. The Magistrate issues warrant, when he has reason to
believe that the accused has absconded or would not obey the summons. Cognizance of any
offence can be taken by a magistrate not only upon a police report but also upon receiving
complaint or upon information received from any person other than a police officer or upon
the knowledge of the magistrate himself. In such cases or where the cognizance has been
taken on a police report in respect of a non-cognizable offence, the magistrate may issue a
warrant of arrest in accordance with the above mentioned rules.

2. ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT: Generally a person shall be arrested with a warrant.

However, a person may be arrested without warrant because of the serious nature of
circumstance and to enable the police to discharge their duties effectively powers of arrest
without warrant are mainly conferred on the police. Arrest without warrant can be made
under the following circumstances:

1. Arrest without warrant by police (section 41,42 and 55)

2. Arrest by private person (Section 43)
3. Arrest by a Magistrate (Section 44)
 1. Arrest without warrant by police (section 41,42 and 55):- Section 41 contains the
circumstances under which the police may arrest without warrant. Section 42
empowers the police to arrest a person accused of committing a non-cognizable
offence, who refused to reveal his/her name and residence. Section 55 lays down the
procedure to be followed by a police officer, who deputes another officer subordinate
to him to arrest a person without warrant.

Powers of police to arrest a person without warrant under the following

circumstance:

1. If a person is actually concerned or reasonably suspected to be concerned in a

cognizable offence.
2. If he has committed or suspected to have committed an act outside India and
the act is punishable under IPC.
3. Against a requisition from another police officer competent to arrest him
without warrant.
4. Any person, who is deserter from any of the Armed forces of the Union.
5. Any person who is in possession without lawful excuse of any implemented of
House breaking.
6. Any person found in possession of any property suspected to be stolen.
7. Any person obstructing a police officer in the discharge of his duties.
8. Any person who has escaped from lawful custody.
9. If a person, in the presence of police officer is accused of committing a non-
cognizable offence and refuses to give his name and address.
10. When a police officer requires any officer subordinate to him to arrest
without warrant any person shall give such order in writing.

2. Arrest by private person (Section 43):

Every person has a duty to inform the police or the nearest Magistrate, the
commission of an offence. He can also arrest if the offender and handover him to
the police.

According to Section 43(1) of the Code, a private person may arrest or cause to
be arrested any person-

1. If he commits a non-bailable and cognizable offence : or

2. If he is a proclaimed offender.

But he shall without any delay make over such person to a police officer
or nearest police station. The police officer may then rearrest the person
so handed over to him.

3. Arrest by Magistrate: Section 44:

Any Magistrate, whether judicial or executive may arrest a person within his jurisdiction:

1. Any person who commits an offence in his local jurisdiction and his presence; or
 2. Any person, for whose arrest, he is competent to issue a warrant.

A magistrate arresting a person under section 44(1) of the Code should not try the
case himself. The person so arrest by the Magistrate shall be produced within 24
hours before another Magistrate otherwise the arrest becomes illegal.

Arrest of Woman -Section 46 (1) Provided &(4)

Mode of arrest of woman can also be divided into two parts (i) Oral Submission, & (ii)
Touching the body of woman.
(i) Oral Submission - According to Section 46(1) Provided her submission to custody on an
oral intimation of arrest shall be presumed. No need to touch the body.

(ii) Touching the body of woman – In special circumstances she may be physically touched
and confined.
Arrest of woman can be divided into two parts namely; (1) Arrest by a woman (2) Arrest by a
man (1) Arrest by a woman – Rule is that arrest of woman can be arrested by woman. In
night (after sun set and before sunrise) she cannot be arrested. ‘Save in exceptional
circumstances’...and .. where such exceptional circumstances exist...denotes that in special
circumstances she can be arrested by woman police officer by making written report to
Judicial Magistrate, First Class and with prior permission of this court.

(2) Arrest by a man – Law is silent on this point.

HOW ARREST IS MADE

Section 46 (1) provides for as to how arrest is to be made. According to the section whether
the arrest to be made is with warrant or without warrant, it is necessary that in making such
arrest, the police officer or other person making the arrest actually touches or confines the
body of the person to be arrested unless there be a submission to custody by word or action.
However, an oral declaration of arrest without actual contact or submission to custody will
not amount to arrest.

The Code of Criminal Procedure has vested the police with the following powers for
effecting an arrest:

(1) Use of force by the Police while making Arrest: - The police may use necessary force to
arrest a person if the person to be arrested resists the arrest or attempts to evade the arrest
under Section 46(2) of CrPC. However, the power to use necessary force for making an arrest
shall not extend to causing the death of a person who is not accused of an offence punishable
with death or with imprisonment for life under Section 46(3) of CrPC. The person arrested is
not to be subjected to more restraint than is necessary to prevent his escape as set out in
Section 49 of CrPC.

(2) The police should not handcuff Accuse in normal circumstances: - The investigating
police are restrained from handcuffing the arrested persons without the prior permission from
the concerned Magistrate. Time and again the Supreme Court has emphasized the need for
exercising caution while handcuffing a person arrested. The Apex Court is not happy about
indiscriminate handcuffing of arrested persons by the police, in spite of the courts warnings.
(3) The Police power to search a place: - Under Section 47 of CrPC the police are
empowered to effect search a place and an occupier of a house is under a legal duty to afford
to the police, and to any person acting under a warrant of arrest, all the facilities to search the
house for the purpose of making arrests. If such facilities are denied or obstructions are put in
the search, the police shall have power to use force for getting entry into the house for search
and also for the purpose of liberating himself in case he is detained in the house. These
powers are subject to reasonable restrictions if the part of the house to be searched is in
occupation of any pardanashin woman. In such instances either she should be called out of
the house or the search is to done in the presence of a woman or a woman police.

(4) The police power to pursue Offenders any place in India: - under Section 48 of CrPC a
police officer may, for the purpose of arresting without warrant any person whom he is
authorized to arrest, pursue such a person into any place in India. In case the arrest is to be
made by the investigating police under a warrant, Section 77 of CrPC makes it clear that the
warrant may be executed at any place in India. However, when a warrant of arrest is to be
executed outside the local jurisdiction of the court issuing it, a special procedure as
prescribed in Sections 78-81 of CrPC will have to be followed.

(5) The police power to obtain assistance: - A police officer can reasonably ask any person
to assist him in the taking of or preventing the escape of any other person whom he (the
officer) is authorized to arrest under Section 37 of CrPC. The person asked to assist is under a
legal obligation to give assistance and any intentional failure on his part is punishable under
Section 187 IPC.

(6) Power to require Subordinate Officer to arrest: - An officer- in- charge of a police
station, or any police officer holding investigation under Chapter XII of CrPC, can require
any subordinate officer to arrest without a warrant (other than in his presence) any person
who may lawfully be arrested without a warrant, and shall deliver to the officer so required
an order in writing, specifying the person to be arrested and the offence or other cause for
which the arrest is to be made under Section 55 of CrPC.

(7) Power to re-arrest escapee: - Section 60 of CrPC provides for 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.

AFTER-ARREST PROCEDURES

(1) Search of arrested person: - Whenever an arrested person cannot legally be admitted to
bail, or is unable to furnish bail, the police officer making the arrest (or to whom the arrested
person is made over after arrest by a private person) may search such a person, and place in
safe custody all articles, other than necessary wearing apparel, found upon him. A receipt
showing the articles so seized shall be given to such a person. The police’s failure to take out
a recovery memo is an irregularity and was however held not vitiating the trial. Where the
arrested person is a woman the search shall be made by another woman with strict regard to
her decency as provided under Section 51 of CrPC.

(2) Seizure of offensive weapons: - The police officer or other person making any arrest may
take any offensive weapons from the person arrested which he has in his person, and shall
deliver all weapons so taken to the court or officer before which or whom the arrested person
is to be produced under Section 52 of CrPC.
(3) Medical examination of accused:- If the offence with which the arrested person is
charged is of such a nature and is alleged to have been committed under such circumstances
that the evidence as to the commission of the offence would be afforded by the medical
examination of such an arrested person, then, at the instance of a police officer not below the
rank of a sub- inspector, such examination could be made by a registered medical practitioner
in order to ascertain the facts that might afford such evidence. For the purposes of such
medical examination such force as is reasonably necessary could also be used. If the person
to be so examined is a woman the examination shall be made by, or under the supervision of,
a registered lady medical practitioner as provided under Section 53 of CrPC. Such medical
examination has been held to be not violation of Article 20(3) of the Constitution as it would
not amount to compelling the arrested person “to be a witness” against himself. The
examination is not restrictively confined to what is visible on the body itself. It may include
testing of blood, sputum, semen, urine, etc. depending upon the nature of the case. If the
process of examination is reasonable, then the discomfort, pain or hurt caused to the
examinee in such examination is justified under Section 53 CrPC.
Section 53-A CrPC makes special provisions for rape cases. It is enacted that in a rape case
the accused could be sent for medical examination by a registered medical practitioner
working in a hospital run by the Government or local authority and in their absence within a
radius of 16 kilometers, any other registered medical practitioner acting at the request of a
police officer not below the rank of sub-inspector. For the purpose of such examination such
force as is necessary can also be used. The registered medical practitioner has to prepare the
report with supporting reasons for his conclusions on each aspect, detailing the names and
address of the accused and the person taking the accused to the medical practitioner, age of
the accused, marks of injury on the person of the accused, the description of material taken
from the accused person for DNA profiling and other material particulars. The exact time of
the commencement and completion of examination will also be noted in the report and a copy
of the report will be sent to the police officer and the magistrate. In case of the examination
taking place at the instance of the accused under sub- section (1) a copy will be given to him
also under Section 54 CrPC. Accused persons who are on bail can also be subjected for
medical examination.

Section 311-A CrPC authorizes the Magistrate to direct any person including an accused to
give specimen signatures or handwriting for the purpose of investigation or other
proceedings. But this order shall not be made if he was at any time arrested in connections
with such investigation.

(4) Reports of arrest to be sent to District Magistrate: - Every police officer- in- charge of a
police station is required to report to the District Magistrate the cases of all persons arrested
without warrant, within the limits of his station under Section 58 CrPC.

(5) Person arrested not to be discharged except on Bond or Bail: - A person who has been
arrested by a police officer shall not be discharged except on his own bond or on bail or under
the special order of a Magistrate under Section 59 CrPC.

Constitution of India

There are following rights of arrested person under Constitution of India -

(1) Right to be informed the grounds of arrest – According to Article 22(1) of Constitution
of India no person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as
soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest.

(2) Right to consult legal practitioner of his choice- According to Article 22(1) arrested
person shall not be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of
his choice.

(3) Right to be produced before Magistrate- According to Article 22(2) every person who is
arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate.

(4) No detention beyond 24 hours. According to Article 22(2) arrested person shall not be
detained in custody beyond 24 hours period without the authority of a magistrate.

RIGHTS OF ARRESTED PERSON

(1) Right to be informed of the grounds for arrest: - In every case of arrest with or without a
warrant the person arresting shall communicate to the arrested person, without delay, the
grounds for his arrest under Section 50 CrPC. This is a precious right of the arrested person
and has been recognized by the Constitution under Article 22(1). Timely information of the
grounds of arrest serves the arrested person in many ways. It gives him an opportunity to
remove any mistake, misapprehension or misunderstanding, if any, in the mind of the
arresting authority. It also enables him to apply for bail, or for a writ of habeas corpus, or to
make other expeditious arrangements for his defence. Under Section 50-A CrPC it obligatory
on the part of the police officer not only to inform the friend or relative of the arrested person
about his arrest etc., but also to make an entry in a register maintained by the police. The
Magistrate is also under an obligation to satisfy himself about the compliance of the law by
the police in this regard.

(2) Right to be informed of right to Bail: - Every police officer arresting, without a warrant,
any person other than a person accused of a non-bailable offence, is required to inform the
person arrested that he is entitled to be released on bail and that he may arrange for sureties
on his behalf under Section 50(2) CrPC.

(3) Right to be produced before a Magistrate without delay: - In case of every arrest,
whether the arrest has been made with or without a warrant, the person arresting is required,
without unnecessary delay and subject to the provisions regarding bail, to produce the
arrested person before the Magistrate or officer-in-charge of a police station having
jurisdiction in the case under Sections 56 and 76 of CrPC. In case of every arrest, the person
making the arrest is required to produce the person making the arrest before the Magistrate,
and it has been categorically provided that such a delay in no case shall exceed 24 hours
exclusive of time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Court of
Magistrate. If it is not complied with, the detention shall be unlawful. When the arrested
person is produced before the Magistrate, it is his duty either to release him on bail or to
remand him.

(4) Right to consult a Legal Practitioner: - Both the Constitution and the provisions of the
CrPC respectively recognize the right of every arrested person to consult a legal practitioner
of his choice under Article 22(1) and Section 303 of CrPC. The right begins from the moment
of arrest. The consultation with the lawyer may be in the presence of the police officer but not
within his hearing.

(5) Right of an arrested Indigent Person to free legal aid and to be informed about it: - In
Khatri 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, and that this constitutional obligation to provide legal aid does not arise only
when the trial commences but also when the accused is for the first time produced before the
Magistrate as also when he is remanded from time to time. However, this constitutional right
of an indigent accused to get free legal aid may prove to be illusory unless he is promptly and
duly informed about it by the court when he is produced before it. The Supreme Court has
therefore cast a duty on all Magistrates and courts to inform the indigent accused about his
right to get free legal aid. In Suk Das vs UT of Arunachal Pradesh, it has been held that this
constitutional right cannot be denied if the accused failed to apply for it.

(6) Right to be examined by a Medical practitioner: - If any arrested person 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, then the Magistrate, on the request of the
arrested person, is required to direct the examination of his body by a registered medical
practitioner. However, the Magistrate need not give such a direction if he considers that the
request for medical examination has been made by the arrested person for the purpose of
vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice under Section 54 CrPC. According to
the direction of Supreme Court, the arrested accused person must be informed by the
Magistrate about his right to be medically examined in terms of Section 54 CrPC.

(7) No handcuffing without reasonable grounds – According to section 49 of Cr.P.C. the

person arrested shall not be subjected to more restraint than is necessary to prevent his
escape. Arrested person shall not be handcuffed without reasonable grounds. In the case of
Prem Shankar Shukla v. Delhi Administration (1980) Supreme Court observed, “Handcuffing
is prima facie inhuman and, therefore, unreasonable, is over-harsh and at the first flush,
arbitrary. Absent fair procedure and objective monitoring, to inflict ‘irons’ is to resort to
zoological strategies repugnant to Art. 21.” If any police officer knowingly handcuffing, he
will be liable under section 220 of IPC.
Guidelines to the Police issued By the Supreme Court

Joginder Kumar vs State Of U.P

(1) An arrested person being held in custody is entitled, if he so requests to have one friend,
relative or other person who is known to him or likely to take an interest in his welfare told as
far as is practicable that he has been arrested and where he is being detained.

(2) The police officer shall inform the arrested person when he is brought to the police station
of this right.
(3) An entry shall be required to be made in the diary as to who was informed of the arrest.

Hon’ble justices Dr. A. S. Anand and Kuldeep Singh of Supreme Court in D.K.Basu v. State
of West Bengal, have laid down the following guidelines for the police who are in to
investigation and policing:
 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 Organization 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 the
time. The “inspection memo” must be signed both by the arrestee and the police
officer effecting 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 Head Quarters,
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 county having territorial jurisdiction over the matter.
The right to compensation for the victims of unlawful arrest and detention has been
recognized by the Supreme Court in Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa, Section 358 of CrPC
provides for compensation to persons groundlessly arrested. As per the section the police
officer who made an arrest of a person without any valid reason is suppose to pay
compensation under the order of the magistrate.

Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (July 02, 2014)

Fact- Marriage between Arnesh Kumar and Sweta was solemnized in 2007. Sweta alleged
that her husband and his family members were demanding Maruti car, eight lakhs rs. an air
conditioner, television set etc. In anticipation of arrest for offence committed under section
498A (Maximum punishment 3 Yrs) and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
(Maximum punishment 2 Yrs) Arnesh Kumar applied for anticipatory bail which was
rejected by Court of Session and later on it was also rejected by High Court. Special Leave
Petition (SLP) was filed before the Supreme Court.
Decision- In this case mainly interpretation of section 41(1) (b) was involved. As we know
that by 2009 amendment section 41 was substituted drastically. Supreme Court issued
guidelines and said that section 41(1)(b) must be strictly followed. Section 41A deals those
cases when arrest was not done under section 41. It was directed that if section 41 is violated
arresting authority will be responsible. If Magistrate does not strictly comply section 167, he
will also be responsible

CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS

RELATING TO ARREST

Non-compliance of the provisions of arrest will result in several serious consequences on

violators. A trial will not be void simply because the provisions relating to arrest have not
been fully complied with. 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. 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. 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. If the arrest is illegal, it is a sort of
false imprisonment, and the arrested person in entitled to claim damages from the person who
made such an arrest.

INHERENT POWERS OF HIGH COURT

Section 482 of ‘The Code’, is a declaratory provision about ‘inherent powers of High Court’, hence the
rights are not conferred by this section on High Court, it suggests that the inherent powers exist per
se in High Court. High Court, being empowered with inherent power has three purposes:

Why inherent power vested with High Court?

When an offence is committed against a person, it’s not just a wrong against a person rather its crime
against a society. Hence, it was prudent vest such powers only with the superior courts and much
experienced judicial mind. This also corroborates (affirm) with sec.483 which declares that High Court
has power to have a continuous superintendence upon the subordinate judicial magistrate.

In Madhu Limaye v. Maharashtra, the Court has observed the following principles that would
govern the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction:

1. That inherent power must not be resorted to, if specific provision for redressal of
grievances is been given.

2. That it should be carefully used to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to
secure ends of justice.

3. That it should not be exercised against the express provision given in any other statute

The inherent power would come into play there being no other provision in the code for the grievance
redressal of the aggrieved party.

Scope of inherent powers of High Court

Inherent powers include – powers to quash FIR, investigation or any criminal proceedings pending
before High Court or subordinate courts to achieve justice. These powers are utilised only when no
other provisions are available. It is not a matter that High Court may interfere anytime in the criminal
proceedings executed by the subordinate courts. High Court will only interfere when there will
miscarriage of justice or if there is extraordinary circumstance.

In the leading case of Bhajan Lal, where the Supreme Court has provided some guidelines to define
the legal position to be followed by High Court while exercising the inherent powers may quash the
criminal complaint or FIR.

a. Bail and Section 482

Article 21 of our Constitution provides, "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty
except according to a procedure established by law". The concept of bail has a direct nexus to Article
21 of the Constitution. Hon'ble Supreme Court has recognized that bail acts a safeguard to the right
of personal liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution

Since no definition of the term “bail” is provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
However, through judicial interpretation we can get the idea of the term “bail”. Bail connotes the
process of procuring the release of an accused charged with certain offence by ensuring his future
attendance in the Court for trial and compelling him to remain within the jurisdiction of the Court.
Chapter XXXIII, Sections 436 till 450 Cr.P.C., deals with the provisions relating to bail and bonds.
Crucial amongst them are, the provisions of Section 437 and 439 Cr.P.C., which provide for grant of
regular bail by Magistrate and by Sessions and High Court, respectively and Section 438 Cr.P.C.,
which deals with the provisions relating to the grant of anticipatory bail by the Courts of Sessions and
High Court. Generally, courts in India works on the principle of ‘grant of bail is a rule and jail is an
exception’. Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is not the sole repository of the power to grant anticipatory bail. The
High Courts are endowed with inherent powers to make such orders as to secure the ends of justice.
Courts in India have consistently recognized that interim bail acts a means to protect a person's
reputation till the adjudication on the main application of bail, susceptible to be dented by the mere
event of arrest of such person and stigma associated therewith. In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, discussing the scope of interim bail, in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors,
has held, "In appropriate cases interim bail should be granted pending disposal of the final bail
application, since arrest and detention of a person can cause irreparable loss to a person's reputation
b. Quashing F.I.R, criminal proceedings and Section 482
The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal
proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is
not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While
compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Power to quash Under Section 482 is attracted even if the
offence is non-compoundable. The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report
should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves
ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles
can be formulated.
Parbatbhai Aahir & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr. , the Supreme Court has laid down broad
principles from various precedents in relation to Section 482 of the Code for quashing of First
Information Reports (FIRs). It follows In R.P. Kapoor v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court observed
the circumstances where High Court may quash the criminal proceedings in a subordinate criminal
court:

● If offence committed by an accused manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against
continuation or institution of the said proceedings.
● If allegations made against the accused person do constitute an offence alleged but there is a
no legal evidence or evidence is clearly inconsistent with accusation made.
● Where the allegations made in FIR or complaint, do not constitute the offence alleged, in such
cases no question of appreciating evidence arises.

Broadly stated that is the nature and scope of the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under section
482 in the matter of quashing criminal proceedings, and that is the effect of the judicial decisions on
the point.

Conclusion

The High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the Supreme Court under
Article 142 of the Constitution of India would not direct quashing of a case involving a crime against
the society particularly when both the learned special judges as also the High Court have found that a
prima facie case has been made out against the appellants herein for framing a charge. Hence,
section 482 does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the
High Court. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report is
not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence under
section 320. The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report should be quashed on
the ground that the offender and victim have settled the disputes revolves on the facts and
circumstances of the case. As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which
have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing in so
far as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned.