RAM SARUP AND ORS. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants have been convicted under Ss. 147 arid 353/149 I.P.C. and have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fine. The sentence of imprisonment has been made consecutive.

(2.) It appears that one Srimati Ramkali was arrested in execution of a warrant in a case under Sec. 498, I.P.C. After her arrest she was forcibly rescued by the applicants. The applicants denied that they had committed the offence. Both the courts below after considering the evidence produced before them were satisfied that Srimati Ramkali had been arrested under a legal warrant and that she was forcibly rescued by the applicants. Accordingly they convicted and sentenced them.

(3.) It was contended before me on behalf of the applicants that the arrest was illegal as the learned Magistrate who issued the warrant did not mention the reasons for issuing it as required under Sec. 90 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and on account of this fact there was no legal arrest of Srimati Ramkali and even if the applicants had rescued her they had not committed any offence. The question for consideration is whether the failure of the Magistrate in giving the reasons for the issue of the warrant instead of a summons makes the warrant illegal and inexecutable or whether it is a mere irregularity and does not affect the validity of the warrant and the arrest under it.