Ramprit Ahir and Others vs King-Emperor

Bucknill, J.—This was an application in criminal provisional ''jurisdiction made by six men. They were tried before art Honorary Magistrate of the First Class, at Arrah and were convicted by him of an offence punishable u/s 147, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced each to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The applicants appealed to the Sessions Judge of Shahabad, who on the 24th of April last dismissed their appeal and upheld the convictions and sentences. The matter has now come up before me a rule having been issued by a Bench of this Court on the 14th May last. The circumstances in the case are very simple although somewhat unusual.

It would seem that some police received some sort of information that it was likely that if they, the police, went to a certain place along the railway line they would discover some people there who, it was said, were probably about to try to rob a train. With commendable zeal a party of police acting upon this information, proceeded to the locality indicated and there sure enough they found the applicants and some other men who were, so far as one can gather, sitting or roaming about somewhere near the railway line. It is said that some or perhaps all of them had actually encroached within the fencing or wire which usually runs along the side of the railway marking what I suppose is the railway property but even if this was so it hardly constitutes an offence for which one would suppose that it was possible for the police rightly to arrest such individuals. There is no doubt as to what actually took place, when the police arrived at the place, and I may say that it was night, they immediately caught hold of these persons who were standing there and endeavoured to arrest them. The applicants and their friends or the persons with whom they put up a fight; they did not see why they should be arrested, it seems doubtful indeed whether the police were in uniform, and from what I gather they appear to have been in mufti; when the applicants were seized by the police, they fought; it is perhaps not surprising that they did. At any rate the applicants and others were eventually secured and taken to the police station. They were then charged with the offence which I have indicated and were convicted and sentenced in the manner to which I have referred.

Now the learned Counsel who has appeared for the applicants points out that it does not seem that the police had any right to arrest these persons and the learned Assistant Government Advocate who has appeared in support of the convictions has not been able to disclose any clear indication as to the powers under which it might be suggested that the police had the right, under the circumstances to which I have referred, to arrest these individuals. It may possibly be, although we cannot say with certainty, that the applicants and their friends were at the locality where they were found for some purpose of a criminal nature, on the other hand, we have no authority for assuming that because a party of persons are in a certain place at a certain ''time they are simply from those circumstances about to enage in a criminal act. I must confess that I can see no legal justification for the arrest of these persons by the police.

Whilst I support and shall continue to support to the best of my ability the maintenance of law and order and the powers exercised by the police when they are properly exercised, I, at the same time, have the utmost respect for the rights of the subject. The detention and arrest of members of the public are not matters of caprice but are governed by and must be conducted upon certain rules and principles which the law clearly-lays down. To arrest persons without any justification is perhaps one of the most serious encroachments upon the liberty of the subject which can well be contemplated. In this case, therefore, I have come to the conclusion without the least-hesitation that there was no good ground shown for arresting these persons and that the convictions and sentences are bad, and must be quashed.