ADVOCATEMMMOHAN: Writ of Mandamus – Article 226 – Direction to Police to arrest accused – Not maintainable Paras 6, 10, 11 A writ of mandamus cannot be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution directing the Police to arrest and remand particular accused persons in a pending investigation, in the absence of mala fides or abuse of power on the part of the investigating agency.

Thursday, January 8, 2026

Writ of Mandamus – Article 226 – Direction to Police to arrest accused – Not maintainable Paras 6, 10, 11 A writ of mandamus cannot be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution directing the Police to arrest and remand particular accused persons in a pending investigation, in the absence of mala fides or abuse of power on the part of the investigating agency.

advocatemmmohan

Writ of Mandamus – Article 226 – Direction to Police to arrest accused – Not maintainable

Paras 6, 10, 11

A writ of mandamus cannot be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution directing the Police to arrest and remand particular accused persons in a pending investigation, in the absence of mala fides or abuse of power on the part of the investigating agency.

Arrest – Not automatic on registration of FIR or non-bailable offences

Paras 6, 9

Arrest does not automatically follow registration of a crime or merely because the alleged offences are non-bailable; arrest is a facet of investigation and depends upon necessity, prima facie material, and satisfaction of the investigating officer.

Investigation – Non-cooperation of complainant – Effect

Paras 7, 8

Where the complainant herself has failed to cooperate with the investigation despite repeated statutory notices and opportunities, delay in investigation cannot be attributed to police inaction, and no direction for arrest can be sought as a matter of right.

SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act – Appointment of senior officer – Proper investigation

Paras 4, 7

Appointment of a Sub-Divisional Police Officer as Investigating Officer pursuant to a private complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. satisfies the statutory mandate, and investigation conducted in accordance with law does not warrant judicial interference.

Extraordinary jurisdiction – Interference with investigation – Limits

Paras 6, 10, 11

In exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, the High Court does not ordinarily interfere with the manner, method or stage of investigation, nor can it compel arrest, unless a clear case of mala fides or abuse of power is established.

Threat allegation – Absence of material – Alternative remedy

Paras 8, 12

A mere allegation of threat, unsupported by cogent material or independent evidence, cannot justify a writ directing arrest; the complainant may instead invoke remedies available under Section 179 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

ANALYSIS

1. Core Issue Before the Court

The sole issue was whether the High Court, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226, could:

compel the Police to arrest and remand accused persons,
solely based on a representation by the complainant.

The Court answered this in the negative.

2. Nature of Arrest in Criminal Law

The Court reiterates settled law that:

Arrest is not a consequence of FIR registration,
Even in non-bailable offences, arrest is not automatic (Paras 6, 9),
Arrest depends on investigative necessity, not complainant demand.

3. Conduct of the Petitioner

A decisive factor was the petitioner’s own conduct:

Repeated non-cooperation,
Failure to appear despite statutory notices,
Insistence on arrest without giving a statement (Paras 4, 7).

The Court held that investigation cannot logically progress to arrest without the complainant’s statement.

4. No Mala Fides or Dereliction Established

The Court found:

Investigation was promptly initiated,
Senior officers were appointed as Investigating Officers,
Witnesses were examined and scene visited (Paras 4, 7).

Hence, no mala fides, abuse of power, or dereliction of duty was made out.

5. Limits of Writ Jurisdiction

The judgment strongly reaffirms:

Separation between investigation and judicial oversight,
Article 226 cannot be converted into a tool for directing arrests,
Granting such relief would amount to unwarranted interference (Paras 6, 10, 11).

6. Supreme Court Jurisprudence Applied

The Court correctly applies the principles laid down in:

Lalita Kumari – FIR ≠ arrest
Arnesh Kumar – unnecessary arrest violates Article 21 (Para 9)

RATIO DECIDENDI

A writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be issued to compel the Police to arrest and remand accused persons during an ongoing investigation, particularly when the complainant herself has not cooperated with the investigation, no mala fides or abuse of power is established, and arrest is neither automatic nor a matter of right even in non-bailable offences.

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN