KOCHI: In view of cases where accused persons were granted bail because the investigating officer did not comply with pre-arrest procedures, the Kerala High Court on Thursday directed all criminal courts in the state to ensure compliance with pre-arrest procedures as laid down in several Supreme Court judgments before considering remand applications.
The Supreme Court has specifically ordered that before ordering remand, the judge or magistrate must obtain an approval in the procedure sheet stating that pre-arrest procedures have been complied with and that the accused has no objection in this regard.
“In case of non-compliance, the judge or special judge… must ensure that the investigating officer complies with the formalities and remand is considered only after ensuring that the formalities are complied with,” Justice A Badharuddin said.
The Supreme Court also said that if a judge or judge notices a deliberate intention by the investigating officer or arresting officer to not comply with formalities, he must recommend disciplinary action against such officers.
The High Court issued the directions while hearing the bail application of a deputy range forest officer accused of sexually assaulting a woman forest officer at his workplace.
According to the prosecution, on February 4, while the forest officer was serving food to her colleagues by torchlight due to a power outage at the deputy range office, the accused touched her inappropriately.
The Supreme Court said that after perusal of the first information statement, “the allegations necessary to constitute the alleged offenses were, prima facie, well presented and the absolute innocence advanced by the appellant’s counsel was found to be inadmissible.”
However, it set aside the order of the special judge denying regular bail to the accused and granted him relief in view of his status as a first-time offender.
“The appellant shall be released on bail after posting his bail $1,00,000 pounds with two solvent guarantors, each with the same amount, to the satisfaction of the competent special court.
“The appellant may not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence. He must cooperate with the investigation and be available for cross-examination,” the Supreme Court said.
It directed the accused to appear before the investigating officer whenever he is asked to do so, and not to make any inducement, threat, or promise to anyone, including the complainant who is familiar with the facts of the case, in order to prevent them from disclosing those facts to any police officer.
The apex court said: “The appellant shall not disturb the actual complainant in any way during the period of bail granted herein and if any such event is reported or brought to the attention of this court, that alone is a ground for cancellation of the bail granted herein.”
It requested the Supreme Court Registry to send a copy of the judgment to all the criminal courts in Kerala and the Director General of Police, to communicate with all investigating officers and station officers to take note of the need to comply with pre-arrest procedures and the consequences of failure to do so.
This article was generated from an automated news feed without any modifications to the text.
