In a significant judgment reinforcing legal accountability within law enforcement, the Bombay High Court has directed a Maharashtra police officer and a constable to provide substantial financial compensation to a man they illegally arrested and detained. Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and SG Chapalgaonkar, who presided over the matter, ordered the investigating officer to pay Rs 2 lakh, while the complainant constable was required to pay Rs 50,000 to his estranged brother-in-law, the victim of the wrongful arrest and detention.
The case began with an FIR filed in June in Hingoli, Maharashtra, amid ongoing divorce proceedings between the petitioner and his wife. During these proceedings, the estranged wife alleged marital cruelty against her husband, the petitioner. As part of her complaint, she accused him of circulating a message to a relative that suggested she had recorded their private moments, which were subsequently circulated by her brother. Following this, her brother, a constable, filed a defamation case against the petitioner, intensifying the legal dispute.
On August 6, 2024, despite the questionable basis of the charges, the petitioner was arrested shortly after midnight, and then quickly brought before a Magistrate’s court, which granted him bail on the same day. The bench sharply criticized the arresting officer, noting the lack of proper grounds for the arrest. They observed that several charges, including the accusation of sending offensive material, had been previously ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, yet were still invoked. Furthermore, the charge regarding a supposedly stolen computer was irrelevant in this case, underscoring the apparent lack of scrutiny in the application of charges.
The High Court did not hold back in its critique of the police officers involved, stressing that such actions reflect a serious failure to uphold legal standards. The bench emphasized that before making any arrest, especially in cases where the alleged offense carries a sentence of fewer than seven years, an investigating officer is legally obligated to evaluate the validity of each invoked section, consider the punishment prescribed, and ascertain if an arrest is genuinely warranted. This requirement for due diligence includes providing a clear and justified reason for the arrest, which the court noted had not been conveyed to the petitioner, marking a violation of his fundamental rights.
The court expressed its dismay at the officer’s disregard for these procedural safeguards, calling such oversight a potential "suicide attempt" on the officer's part, as failing to verify the legal grounds before effecting an arrest could lead to significant repercussions. They emphasized that the officer must apply a thoughtful approach to ensure the law is respected and that the person’s rights are not infringed upon in the arrest process.Â
In making this ruling, the court’s decision serves as a potent reminder that law enforcement officials are bound by the Constitution and legal precedents that aim to protect individual freedoms and ensure arrests are lawful and justified. By ordering substantial compensation, the court aimed to reinforce accountability and send a strong message regarding the significance of respecting legal boundaries and due process in every arrest. This case also underscores the judiciary’s commitment to protecting citizens from misuse of power by officials and upholding justice, even when it involves state machinery.
Â
