Delhi High Court
Dr. Subhash Vijayran vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 July, 2017
$~25
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 6027/2017
% Date of Decision : 18th July, 2017
DR. SUBHASH VIJAYRAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Petitioner-in-person.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj,
CGSC for R-1 & 2/UOI.
Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.
R.A. Iyer, Adv. for R-3/GNCTD.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
1. Issue notice to show cause as to why rule nisi be not issued.
2. Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, learned Standing Counsel for
the Central Government accepts notice for the respondent Nos.1
& 2. Mr. Gautam Narayan, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the
GNCTD accepts notice for the respondent No.3.
3. By this petition, the petitioner who appears in person, has
made complaints that the respondents are violating the mandate of
Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India taking advantage of the
ignorance regarding the rights of the citizens thereunder. The writ
petitioner is concerned with the failure of the respondents to abide
by the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu vs.
State of West Bengal (1971) 1 SCC 416 as well as Joginder
Kumar vs. State of U.P. (1994) 4 SCC 260.
4. The writ petition itself discloses that pursuant to the
decisions of the Supreme Court in the above cases, the
Commissioner of Police, Delhi has issued Standing Order
No.330/2008 titled "Guidelines for Arrest" dated 18.10.2008. This
Standing Order has been placed on Pg.25 of the record.
5. Though the respondents may have technically complied with
the mandate of the directions laid down by the Supreme Court,
there does appear to be ignorance of the public about their rights in
the event of an arrest.
6. The petitioner submits that the respondents are required to
make wide publicity of the Standing Order No.330/2008. He also
makes a grievance that inasmuch as under the Cr.P.C., the officer
who effects the arrest sends information thereof to the higher
authorities as well as the area Magistrate, there is a possibility of
information being conveyed belatedly. He also has an
apprehension of several other illegalities being committed.
Averments in this regard are made at Para 10 of the writ petition.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that a
help-line number is required to be provided where information
regarding arrest of a person could be given by the relatives, friends
or the family members of the public. This would also be a check
on the interference in the fairness of investigation.
8. It is also submitted that the National Human Rights
Commission of India during the period 01.04.2010 to 30.09.2013
registered 3949 cases of illegal arrest and 4467 cases of unlawful
detention by the police and after detailed inquiry into the matter,
compensation in 45 cases of illegal arrest and 67 cases of unlawful
detention has been made.
9. In view thereof, we direct as follows:
(i) The respondents shall ensure that the steps are taken
forthwith to disseminate information about the Standing
Order No.330/2008. The same should be published in the
vernacular languages and circulated amongst the members of
the public. A copy thereof be made available to every
person upon their arrest.
(ii) The Commissioner of Police shall examine the
possibility of creation of help-line where information
regarding arrest of a person could be given by the relatives,
friends or the family members of the public. This
consideration shall be effected within four weeks from today
and report in this regard shall be submitted before this Court
with an advance copy of the same to the petitioner.
10. Writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.
Dasti.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
JULY 18, 2017/pmc
