The Supreme Court on Monday partially modified directions issued by the Kerala High Court concerning police action and arrests within court premises, while also addressing concerns regarding the composition of oversight committees constituted by the High Court.
The case arose from suo motu proceedings initiated by the Kerala High Court following an altercation between advocates and police officers within the premises of a First Class Judicial Magistrate Court in Alappuzha district.
During the hearing, the Kerala Police Officers Association challenged certain directions issued by the High Court, arguing that they were overly broad and placed undue restrictions on police powers.
The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi noted that the definition of “court premises” given by the High Court did not require clarification, but found that some of the directions relating to police action were too restrictive. The Bench therefore modified the High Court’s directions to clarify the circumstances in which police officers may act within court premises. The Court held that police officers may:
• Arrest persons in court premises or use necessary force in order to prevent the occurrence of a cognizable offence within the court premises.
• Arrest the accused or suspect immediately upon committing an offence when such a person can be apprehended at the spot.
• Police officers may act to prevent any suspect or accused from hiding in court premises or entering the court premises with a view to avoid arrest.
The Supreme Court also considered objections raised by the Police Officers Association regarding the composition of state-level and district-level committees created to address disputes between police and members of the Bar.
While noting that senior police officials were already part of the committees, the Court accepted the submission that an additional police representative should be included to ensure that the police perspective is adequately represented. Accordingly, the Court directed that:
“One more police officer shall be included as a member of the district-level committee, to be nominated by the jurisdictional Inspector General of Police or Commissioner of Police.”
At the same time, the Court clarified that the committees cannot dilute the statutory powers or responsibilities of police officers in maintaining law and order.
“The task given to the State-level or District-level committees cannot be used to dilute the powers, duties or responsibilities of authorised police officers in maintaining law and order,” the Bench observed.