Mumbai, Oct 30 The Bombay High Court has held the arrest of activist Arun Ferreira in September 2011 on charges of being a member of a Naxal group as illegal and ordered the Maharashtra government to pay him Rs 2 lakh as compensation.
Ferreira is also an accused in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon case. He is presently out on bail in the case.
In its October 27 judgment, the Nagpur bench of Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Raj Wakode came down heavily on the police for branding Ferreira as absconding in the case even though he was in jail since 2007.
The court said his arrest in 2011, just as he walked out of the Nagpur prison after being acquitted in all pending cases against him at the time, violated constitutional safeguards.
Ferreira was arrested in 2007 in multiple cases. Following acquittal in all the cases, the activist was to be released from Nagpur prison in September 2011.
However, the moment he walked out of jail, he was accosted by a police team, taken away in a vehicle and later shown as arrested by the Gadchiroli police.
In his plea, Ferreira said he was not informed of the grounds of his arrest at the time.
The HC, in its order, said the police violated Ferreira’s fundamental rights under Articles 21 (right to liberty) and 22 (protection against arrest and detention) of the Constitution.
When the police, whose primary responsibility is to protect the law, violate it, then punishment for such violation has to be proportionately stringent so as to have deterrent effect and instill confidence in society, the court said.
It may not be out of context to remind that the motto of Maharashtra police is ‘Sadrakshnaya Khalanighrahanaya’ (To protect the good and to punish the evil), which needs to be respected, the HC said.
Law enforcement agencies must bear in mind that they have a duty not merely to the individual accused before them, but also to the State and to the community at large, the HC added.
The police, while opposing the plea, argued that secrecy was necessary because of alleged Naxal links.
The HC bench, however, rejected this argument, holding that the constitutional duty to give reasons for an arrest applies without exception.
(PTI News)
