Jump to content

Arnesh Kumar Guidelines: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Add Link
Add
Line 11: Line 11:
|full name = Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar
|full name = Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar
|date decided = 2014
|date decided = 2014
|citations =
|citations = 2014 8 SCC 273
|ECLI =
|ECLI =
|transcripts =
|transcripts =

Revision as of 10:03, 21 November 2021

Arnesh Kumar Guidelines
CourtSupreme Court of India
Full case name Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar
Decided2014
Citation2014 8 SCC 273

Arnesh Kumar Guidelines or Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar (2014) is a landmark judgement of the Indian Supreme Court,[1][2] stating arrests should be an exception, in cases where the punishment is less than seven years of imprisonment.[3] The guidelines asked the police to determine whether an arrest was necessary under the provisions of Section 41 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Police officers have a responsibility to guarantee that the principles established by the Supreme Court in its numerous decisions are followed by the investigating officers. Before authorising further detention, the judicial magistrate must read the police officer's report and make sure they are satisfied.[1]

The decision was welcomed by men's right activists but was criticised by women rights activists.[4]

Background

In 1983, Section 498A was enacted, together with Section 304B on dowry deaths, to combat the threat of rising dowry deaths and the cruelty meted out to married women by their in-laws.[1]

There is growing criticism that the dowry laws are often being misused, particularly the section 498A of the Indian Penal Code which is observed by many in India as being prone to misuse because of mechanical arrests by the police.[5] According to the National Crime Records Bureau statistics, in 2012, nearly 200,000 people including 47,951 women, were arrested in regard to dowry offences. However, only 15% of the accused were convicted.[6] The period between 2006 and 2015, has seen a continuous fall in the conviction rate for cases, filed under this section. It has the lowest conviction rate among all the crimes under Indian Penal Code.[7]

In many cases of 498a, huge amounts of dowry are claimed without any valid reasoning. A low income household's wife can allege that she gave crores of money as dowry and since it is a cognizable case, police are bound to register the case. And in most cases, the capacity of the wife or her parents and the source of the funds are never tracked.

Section 498A IPC was challenged but upheld by the Supreme Court of India in 2005.[8] In 2010, the Supreme Court lamented about the possible misuse of anti-dowry laws in Preeti Gupta & Another v. State of Jharkhand & Another and recommended a detailed investigation.[9] Based on the Supreme Court's observations, the Indian parliament set up a committee headed by Bhagat Singh Koshyari.[10]

Judgement

On 2 July 2014, the Supreme Court while framed the guidelines the response to a Special Leave Petition (SPL) filed by one Arnesh Kumar challenging his arrest and of his family under this law.[11][12] In the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar & Anr.,[11] a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court reviewed the enforcement of section 41(1)(A) of CrPC which instructs state of following certain procedure before arrest, and went on to observe that the 498A had become a powerful weapon in the hands of disgruntled wives where innocent people were arrested without any evidence due to non-bailable and cognizable nature of the law.[6][13] The Supreme Court said that the anti dowry law (Section 498A) is being used by some women to harass their husband and in-laws. The court prohibited the police from making arrests on the mere basis of a complaint. The court asked the police to follow Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which provides a 9-point checklist which must be used to decide the need for an arrest. The court also said that a magistrate must decide whether an arrested accused is needed to be kept under further detention.[14][11]

Reaction

Others welcomed the decision as landmark judgment to uphold the human rights of innocent people.[15][16] The decision received criticism from feminists because it weakened the negotiating power of women.[17][18][19]

Aftermath

However, due to lack of communication to police stations, the guidelines of Supreme Court of India are still not getting followed.[20]

In May 2021, the amicus curiae submitted that the Madhya Pradesh Police were not following the Arnesh Kumar guidelines. Madhya Pradesh High Court ordered that the Director general of police (DGP) must issue directions to Police to follow the Arnesh Kumar Guidelines. The accused who were arrested without following the Arnesh Kumar Guidelines were entitled to directly apply for regular bail on this ground alone. The court also asked the State Judicial Academy to spread awareness of the Arnesh Kumar Guidelines among the police officers and judicial magistrates.[3]

In 2021 due to the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in India, The Supreme Court said that no arrests should be made in violation of the Arnesh Kumar Guidelines.[3]

Reference

  1. ^ a b c Vij, R. K. (3 November 2021). "On dealing with false criminal cases". The Hindu. Retrieved 21 November 2021.
  2. ^ James, Sebin (21 November 2021). "Police Officials To Face Action If Arrest Procedure Under Sec 41A CrPC & 'Arnesh Kumar' Guidelines Are Violated : Telangana High Court". www.livelaw.in. Retrieved 21 November 2021.
  3. ^ a b c "DGP Must Issue Directions to Police To Adhere to SC Guidelines in Arnesh Kumar: Madhya Pradesh HC". The Wire. 20 May 2021. Retrieved 21 November 2021.
  4. ^ Pallavi Polanki (4 July 2014). "Activists on SC ruling: Why single out dowry harassment law as case of misuse?". First Post. Retrieved 23 July 2014.
  5. ^ "Amend dowry law to stop its misuse, SC tells govt". The Times of India. 17 August 2010. Archived from the original on 7 July 2012.
  6. ^ a b "Women Misusing India's Anti-Dowry Law, says Supreme Court". 3 July 2014. Archived from the original on 9 January 2015.
  7. ^ Dubbudu, Rakesh (29 July 2017). "Debate I Low Conviction Rate in Dowry Cases, No Proof of Misuse". TheQuint. Retrieved 21 November 2021.
  8. ^ "Sushil Kumar Sharma vs Union Of India And Ors on 19 July, 2005". Indiankanoon.org. Archived from the original on 11 February 2013. Retrieved 18 February 2013.
  9. ^ Preeti Gupta & Another v. State of Jharkhand & Another, AIR 2010 SC 3363
  10. ^ "Par Panel recommends review of Dowry Act". Archived from the original on 18 May 2015.
  11. ^ a b c Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (Supreme Court of India 2014), Text.
  12. ^ "No automatic arrests in dowry cases, says SC". The Hindu. 3 July 2014. Retrieved 23 July 2014.
  13. ^ Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar & Anr., AIR 2014 SC 2756
  14. ^ "No arrests under anti-dowry law without magistrate's nod: SC". The Times of India. 3 July 2013. Retrieved 23 July 2014.
  15. ^ Dhulia, Virag (6 July 2014). "Supreme Court judgment restricting automatic arrests in dowry cases well within the Constitution". MeriNews. Archived from the original on 22 July 2015. Retrieved 22 July 2015.
  16. ^ Singh, Abha (3 July 2014). "Abha Singh calls Supreme Court decision on Section 498A a landmark judgement". India.com. ANI. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 22 July 2015.
  17. ^ Jaising, Indira (July 2014). "Concern for the Dead, Condemnation for the Living". Economic & Political Weekly. 49 (30).
  18. ^ Why Women need 498A, Economic & Political Weekly, vol. XLIX no. 29 (July 2014)
  19. ^ Prashant K. Trivnd Smriti Singh (December 2014). "Fallacies of a Supreme Court Judgment: Section 498A and the Dynamics of Acquittals". Economic & Political Weekly. 44 (52).
  20. ^ "False complaints to be punished". Navodaya Times. 23 November 2014. Retrieved 26 November 2014.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Arnesh_Kumar_Guidelines&oldid=1056365035"