Mechanical arrests need to be avoided
Supreme Court attempts to curb routine arrests in minor cases with new guidelines for lower judiciary and police.
A peculiar and unfortunate aspect of the criminal justice system is the proclivity of law-enforcement agencies to arrest people routinely in cases with relatively minor charges and punishments. Clear instructions from the Supreme Court and guidelines that say that no one should be mechanically arrested in cases where the allegations of offences carry a maximum punishment of up to seven years in jail continue to be rampantly violated. In a new order on Monday, the apex court attempted to set this right, saying that the directions issued in its previous 2014 judgment, Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar, will be modelled as guidelines to be circulated by all high courts and state police chiefs to district court judges and police authorities. 
Such arrests militate against the constitutional rights to life and liberty because they are not commensurate with the quantum and the seriousness of the allegations. Just because an arrest can be made doesn’t mean it should — because the curtailment of personal liberty should only happen after due consideration and deliberation, not as a matter of routine. It is also no coincidence that a number of people who languish behind bars are those who come from marginalised communities and have little resources. Over the last decade, such arrests have continued despite the apex court issuing and reiterating its dictums. What is needed is a transformation in attitudes in the lower judiciary where many judges still remain hesitant in granting bail, and among police officers who are often far too eager to arrest people. If the circulation of the top court’s guidelines can engender a shift in such mindsets, it will benefit the country.
Experience unrestricted digital access with HT Premium
