Rajasthan High Court Convicts Former ACB Officer for Contempt Over Arrest Violations
In a significant ruling, a single-judge bench of the Rajasthan High Court has found a former Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) officer guilty of contempt of court for flouting mandatory arrest protocols and infringing upon the personal liberty of an accused individual. The court has directed the officer to appear in person, with the matter scheduled for further proceedings on April 6.
Violation of Supreme Court Guidelines in Arrest Procedure
In an order issued on Monday, Justice Praveer Bhatnagar's bench stated that Pushpendra Singh Rathore, who served as Additional Superintendent of Police in the ACB during 2023, failed to adhere to binding guidelines established by the Supreme Court in the landmark Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar case. The contempt case stemmed from the arrest of petitioner Ravi Meena on February 1, 2023, in connection with an ACB FIR involving corruption charges.
"We argued that the petitioner was arrested without proper notice under Section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which requires prior notice before arrest in cases where immediate detention is not necessary," explained Mohit Khandelwal, counsel representing the petitioner.
WhatsApp Notice Deemed Invalid by Court
The court noted that the only notice provided to the petitioner was sent via WhatsApp on January 25, 2023, instructing him to appear for investigation. During this period, Meena responded promptly, requesting time due to his wife's illness. However, the investigating agency neither replied nor issued a formal notice through legally recognized channels, ultimately proceeding with the arrest on February 1, 2023.
Rejecting the ACB's justification, the court ruled that WhatsApp communication cannot be considered valid service of notice under Section 41-A of the CrPC, citing Supreme Court directives from the Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI case. Justice Bhatnagar observed that "despite the petitioner's cooperation, no proper notice was served" and "no valid reasons for arrest were recorded."
Court Highlights Breach of Constitutional Safeguards
The court further emphasized that "even after filing the charge sheet, the necessity for arrest was not justified by the officer," underscoring the procedural lapses. Describing the arrest as a "clear breach of statutory safeguards and constitutional protections under Article 21," the court concluded that the officer acted in violation of established legal procedures.
"Accordingly, this court is satisfied that Pushpendra Singh Rathore has committed contempt by violating the principles laid down by the Supreme Court and breached the personal liberty of the petitioner," the court stated in its observation.
This ruling reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding procedural integrity and protecting individual rights against arbitrary enforcement actions, setting a precedent for adherence to legal standards in arrest processes.
