LAWS(APH)-1954-9-31

IN RE: KOLAVENNU VENKAYYA Vs. STATE

Decided On September 30, 1954
In Re: Kolavennu Venkayya Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Petition raises an interesting question of law. The petitioner committed an offence under Sec. 302, Indian Penal Code. He absconded and returned to his village 15 days after the commission of the offence. When he was lying inside the house, P.W. 2 who happened to be present at the time of the commission of the offence and P.W. 1 and others entered the house and sought to arrest the accused and he got up from the cot and stabbed P.W. 1.

(2.) The main question that arises for consideration is really whether P.W. 2 who actually saw the accused commit the offence punishable under Sec. 302 could arrest the accused 15 days afterwards. Sub-Sec. (1) clearly sets out that any private person may arrest any person who in his view commits a non-bailable and cognizable offence. The Sub-Sec. (1) does say that if a non-bailable and cognisable offence was committed long ago, a person who actually was present at that time could arrest him whenever he liked i.e., long after the commission of the offence. The expression actually used by the Legislature is "commits" and "had committed". This view of mine is supported by the passages in Halsbury's Laws of England, Vol. 9 at pages 86 and 95. At page 86, the law is set out as follows :

(3.) In the above view, the Revision Petition has to be allowed and the conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below have to be set aside.