A day after a dramatic face-off between police personnel of Delhi and Himachal Pradesh over the arrest of three accused in the AI Summit shirtless protest case, a debate has begun over which cops have the upper hand in such an impasse.
The law does not have an objective answer to this question, and courts, including the Supreme Court, have stressed cooperative federalism and said these disputes must be resolved through dialogue.
Three sections of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, which has replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure, are relevant in this context.
Section 45 states that a police officer may, for the purpose of arresting without warrant any person whom he is authorised to arrest, pursue such person into any place in India. This effectively means that police of any state can pursue an accused to any part of the country and there is no bar. This means Delhi Police, which comes under the Centre, was free to pursue the accused to Shimla, which is in Congress-ruled Himachal Pradesh.
Then comes Section 82, which lays down that when an arrest is executed outside the district in which it was issued, the police officer shall inform the local police. Also significant is Section 81, which states that when an arrest warrant is to be executed beyond the local jurisdiction of the Court issuing it, police shall ordinarily take it for endorsement to a local magistrate or a local police officer.
What Happened In Shimla
Three Indian Youth Congress Workers -- Saurabh, Siddharth and Arbaz, were arrested in Shimla yesterday in connection with the shirtless protest at the AI Impact Summit in Delhi. But before Delhi Police could bring them to the national capital, Himachal cops confronted them. Delhi Police said they had a valid transit remand from a local court, but Himachal Police alleged lapses and registered a kidnapping case against unidentified Delhi Police personnel. Eventually, Delhi cops brought the accused back, but this followed several stops at Himachal checkpoints, which also led to traffic woes.
What Legal Expert Said
NDTV spoke to senior lawyer RK Singh about this impasse. He said the police force is an institution under every state's jurisdiction. But since crime cannot be restricted to state boundaries, the makers of the Constitution came up with a unique provision. This provision, which does not exist even in developed countries, puts the police force under the jurisdiction of state governments but also extends its powers outside state borders in a mention under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. This, however, points out that such powers cannot operate without the consent of the state government where the action is being carried out. The senior lawyer said that in the event of a clash between the police forces of two states, senior officers need to find a way out through dialogue. This is the same line the Supreme Court, too, has taken in several cases.
