The Rajasthan High Court, in its notice dated 30.07.2023, has issued a set of directives in line with the instructions provided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated July 31, 2023, in criminal appeal No. 2207 of 2023, Mohammad Ashfak Alam Vs. The state of Jharkhand and Anr., which arose from a Special Leave Petition (crl) No. 3433/2023. These directives are also aligned with the guidelines outlined in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr. (2014) 8 SCR 128, as well as other related directions.

The primary objective of these directives is to ensure that police officers refrain from making unnecessary arrests and that magistrates can only authorize detentions when they have thoroughly considered the matter and can provide proper justification.

1. The State government shall instruct the police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under section 498A IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down in the case of Mohammad Ashfak Alam (supra) and Rnesh Kumar (supra) flowing from section 41 Cr.P.C.;

2. All police officers be provided with a checklist containing specified Sub-clauses under section 41(b)(ii) of the Cr.P.C.;

3. The police officer shall forward the checklist duly filled and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention;

4. The Magistrate while authorizing detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorize detention;

5. The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing;

6. Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41A Cr.P.C be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing;

7.  Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for department action, they shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before the High Court;

8. Authorizing detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the Judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the High Court;

9. The aforesaid directions shall not only apply to cases under section 498A IPC or section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, but also such cases where offence is 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.

The court also stated that all Sessions Courts and other Criminal Courts handling different offences must adhere to the aforementioned instructions and guidance.