Question

S.41-B is inserted in to the Criminal Procedure Code on the basis of which among the following decisions

• A. Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dhani
• B. Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration
• C. Prem Shankar Shukla v. Delhi Administration
• D. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal

Hint:

Associate the \textit{D.K. Basu} judgment with the codification of procedural safeguards during arrest. Whenever you see questions about the arrest memo (S. 41B), the right to inform a friend/relative (S. 50A), or the right to meet a lawyer during interrogation (S. 41D), the source is the D.K. Basu guidelines.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The Supreme Court of India has, through its judgments, laid down several guidelines to protect the rights of arrested persons and to prevent abuse of power by the police, particularly concerning custodial violence. These guidelines have often been incorporated into the CrPC through amendments.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The case of D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) is a landmark judgment on the rights of arrested persons. In this case, the Supreme Court expressed deep concern over custodial torture and deaths in police custody. To curb this menace, the Court issued a set of 11 mandatory guidelines to be followed by the police and other arresting agencies in all cases of arrest and detention. These guidelines included:
- The police personnel carrying out the arrest should bear accurate and visible identification.
- A memo of arrest must be prepared at the time of arrest.
- The person arrested has a right to have a friend, relative, or other person known to him informed of his arrest.
- The person arrested should be made aware of his right to have someone informed of his arrest.
Many of these guidelines were incorporated into the CrPC by the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2008. Specifically, Section 41B ("Procedure of arrest and duties of officer making arrest"), Section 41D ("Right of arrested person to meet an advocate of his choice during interrogation"), and Section 50A ("Obligation of person making arrest to inform about the arrest to a nominated person") are direct consequences of the D.K. Basu judgment.
The other cases are also important human rights cases but are not the direct basis for Section 41B. \textit{Nandini Satpathy} deals with the right against self-incrimination (Art 20(3)). \textit{Sunil Batra} and \textit{Prem Shankar Shukla} deal with the rights of prisoners and the issue of handcuffing.