Synopsis
The Madras High Court clarified that the legal restrictions on arresting women after sunset and before sunrise are advisory rather than mandatory. It emphasized that these restrictions act as a precaution, requiring justification if not adhered to. The court recommended establishing guidelines to outline exceptional circumstances and proposed a local amendment to the law.
The Madras High Court has held that the legal restrictions on arresting women after sunset and before sunrise are advisory rather than compulsory. A division bench comprising Justice G.R. Swaminathan and Justice M. Jothiraman clarified that while the provision acts as a precautionary measure for law enforcement, non-compliance does not automatically invalidate the arrest. However, officers must provide justification for deviating from the prescribed procedure, according to a TOI report.
Statutory provision and interpretation
The court emphasized that the law forbids the arrest of women at night, except in exceptional circumstances, which require prior approval from the jurisdictional magistrate. However, it pointed out that the provision does not specify what qualifies as an exceptional situation.
Citing the case of Salma vs. The State, the court noted that a single judge had previously established guidelines for the arrest of women. However, the division bench found these guidelines inadequate in offering clear direction to law enforcement officers.
Call for clearer guidelines
The bench instructed the police department to develop additional guidelines to define what constitutes an exceptional situation justifying the arrest of a woman at night. It also suggested that the state legislature consider amending Section 43 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) in accordance with the recommendations outlined in the Law Commission of India’s 154th report.
Reversal of disciplinary action
The court overturned a single judge’s order for disciplinary action against Inspector Anitha and Head Constable Krishnaveni for arresting a woman after sunset. However, it upheld the action against Sub-Inspector Deepa for misrepresenting facts before the court.
This ruling highlights the importance of clearer legal interpretations and procedural safeguards for the nighttime arrest of women.