The Kerala High Court in the case Anand Mahadevan V State Of Kerala observed and has reiterated that the police cannot arrest a person under Section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arrest in order to prevent the commission of cognizable offences, which being without the knowledge of the existence of a design to commit a cognizable offence and a belief that the commission of the offence can only be prevented when the said person is being arrested.
The single bench headed by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas in the case observed that the police has been granted the extraordinary powers of arresting the person without a warrant in case of knowledge of a design in order to commit a cognizable offence and it being very important to avoid strict interpretation of section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for misuse of any such power.
In the said case, the plea was considered by court by a practicing advocate against whom an FIR had been registered wherein it is alleged that he is a threat to the maintenance of peace in public. Further, the court observed that he was immediately released from the police station after his arrest was recorded.
The court also cautioned that the misuse of Section 151 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the same would also amount to violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The court in the case observed that even though the FIR was registered against the petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, there being nothing to show that the police had knowledge of a design in order to commit an offence. It has also been held by the court that in such kind of situation, the registration of the FIR which being against the petitioner is the abuse of the process of the Court. Further, it has been stated by the court that the registration of the crime hangs as a damocles sword over petitioner’s head, the court stated while invoking powers stated under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings which are initiated against the petitioner.
Accordingly, the court quash the proceedings.
The counsel, Advocate Appu Ajith appeared for the petitioner and Seetha. S, the Public Prosecutor appeared for the state.
