Jharkhand: The Jharkhand High Court has delivered a significant judgment, holding two police officials guilty of criminal contempt for arresting Instakart employees in violation of Supreme Court guidelines, thereby emphasizing the importance of following proper arrest procedures.
Chief Justice MS Ramachandra Rao and Justice Deepak Roshan made critical observations regarding the arbitrary nature of the arrests and the violation of personal liberty.
The case pertained to two Instakart employees who were arrested by officials from the Jagarnathpur Police Station based on a complaint regarding Myntra deliveries. The court noted, “The alleged insistence by petitioners and the co-accused to the complainant for an OTP from the complainant to deliver certain products from Myntra Company by itself cannot be a justification for the arrest, that too within the precincts of the police station, and for suspecting them to be cyber criminals. This defence is ridiculous and cannot be accepted.”
Addressing the violation of Supreme Court guidelines, the court observed, “Personal liberty is an important fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of India, and unless there is an absolute necessity for arrest, personal liberty cannot be taken away in this arbitrary manner as was done by Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3.”
The court highlighted the mechanical nature of the arrests, stating, “The check-list containing the specified sub-clauses under Section 41(1)(b)(ii) has to be filled up by applying mind, and such reasons need to be recorded in writing. This was not done in the instant case by Opposite Party No. 2 and Opposite Party No. 3.”
In response to the contempt petition, the court sentenced the two police officials to one month’s simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs 2,000 each. The court also directed the State to initiate disciplinary action against them, to be concluded within six months of their release.
Additionally, the court awarded costs of Rs 50,000 each to the petitioners, to be paid equally by the two police officials, and left it open for the petitioners to seek further compensation for wrongful arrest through other legal remedies.
Mr. Indrajit Sinha appeared for the petitioners. Mr. Rohit, Assistant Counsel to Advocate General, appeared for the State. Md. Jaisur Rahman appeared for Opposite Party No. 3.
Case title: Irshad and Anr v. State of Jharkhand & Ors
![Supreme Court Collegium approves new Chief Justices for five key High Courts in India [Read Recommendations]](/secure/uploads/2023/12/lj_8000_380d1135-6f3a-4988-a00a-4d5cd5901815.jpg)
!['Arbitrary, impermissible,' SC quashes HC's resolution raising aggregate cut off marks on district judges appointment [Read Judgment]](/secure/uploads/2024/02/lj_3605_Rule-for-Judge-Selection.webp)
