Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

To avail the benefit of insurance policy of Rs.1,50,00,000/-, an innocent person was killed to portray that the accused had met with an accident and in the said accident, the car in which the accused was travelling caught fire and got burnt.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Merely by mentioning in the arrest memo that the petitioner has been inconsistent in his statements before the Investigating Officer and has kept on changing his versions and as such, has not co-operated with the investigation in disclosing full and true facts, is not sufficient and the same cannot be a ground of arrest as it is unacceptable and contrary to the mandate of Section 41(1)(b)(i)&(ii) from (a) to (e) of the CrPC.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

The reason given in the arrest memos to arrest the petitioners, having regard to the facts, appears to be casual, mechanical and perfunctory, clearly without application of mind. The grounds for arrest of the petitioners mentioned in the arrest memos clearly breach the mandatory provisions of Sections 41 and 41-A and 60-A of the Criminal Procedure Code.