Disposed

Modumudi Kutumba Rao v. The State of Ap.

Telangana HC24 Mar 2014CRLP/3121/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking a direction to the investigating agency to comply with Section 41 Cr.P.C. while deciding whether to arrest the petitioners. The High Court directed the investigating officer to scrupulously follow arrest conditions and record reasons.

What did the court decide?

Directed the investigating officer to scrupulously follow conditions of Section 41(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. while deciding on arrest and record reasons.

Modumudi Kutumba Rao Vs The State of Ap. — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3121 OF 2014

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/A-1 to A-4, under Section 482 Cr.P.C, seeking quashing of investigation in Crime No.61 of 2014 of Challapalli Police Station, Krishna District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 387, 384, 353, 420 and 506 read with 34 IPC.

¶5

Though the learned counsel for the petitioners filed this Criminal Petition seeking quashing of investigation in Crime No.61 of 2014, he, however, restricts his prayer seeking a direction to the Investigating agency to follow the provisions as contemplated under Section 41 CrPC. The said argument is not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶6

Section 41 Cr.P.C. reads as under:

¶7

When police may arrest without warrant.

¶8

(1) Any police officer may without an order from a Magistrate and without a warrant, arrest any person –

¶9

(a) who commits, in the presence of a police officer, a cognizance offence;

¶10

(b) against whom a reasonable complaint has been made, or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists than he has committed a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years whether with or without fine, if the following conditions are satisfied, namely:-

¶11

(i) the police officer has reason to believe on the basis of such complaint, information, or suspicion that such person has committed the said offence;

¶12

(ii) the police officer is satisfied that such arrest is necessary-

¶13

a) to prevent such person from committing any further offence; or

¶14

b) for proper investigation of the offence; or

¶15

c) to prevent such person from causing the

¶16

evidence of the offence to disappear or tampering with such evidence in any manner; or

¶17

d) to prevent such person from making any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the police officer; or

¶18

e) as unless such person is arrested, his presence in the Court whenever required cannot be ensured,

¶19

and the police officer shall record while making such arrest, his reasons in writing; (Provided that a police officer shall, in all cases where the arrest of a person is not required under the provisions of this sub-section, record the reasons in writing for not making the arrest.)

¶20

From the above it is clear that the police officer, before arresting any person, has to be satisfied that such an arrest is necessary in terms of clauses (a) to (e) of Section 41(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. and he has to record reasons while making such arrest. For the aforesaid reasons, it is ordered that the investigating officer while exercising discretion, whether or not to arrest the petitioners herein, under Section 41 Cr.P.C. shall scrupulously follow the conditions stipulated therein.

¶21

With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶22

C.PRAVEEN KUMAR,J

¶23

Date:24.03.2014 usd

Modumudi Kutumba Rao v. The State of Ap.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Modumudi Kutumba Rao v. The State of Ap.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alakuntla Venkanna S/o Mallaiah Vs The State of A.P.

Al-Kabeer Exports Private Ltd., Vs State

B.S.Purushotham Reddy, S/o. Sanjeeva Reddy, Vs The State of A.P.

Mulugu Chandra Sekhar, Vs Chundi Kavitha

G.Sudheer Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Ranganna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh