Chapter V
Section 42 CrPC: Arrest on refusal to give name and residence
New Law Update (2024)
Section 44 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Magistrate
Punishment
Procedural / Administrative
Cognizable?
Non-Cognizable
Bailable?
Bailable
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(1) When any person who, in the presence of a police officer, has committed or has been accused of committing a non-cognizable offence refuses, on demand of such officer, to give his name and residence or gives a name or residence which such officer has reason to believe to be false, he may be arrested by such officer in order that his name or residence may be ascertained.
(2) When the true name and residence of such person have been ascertained, he shall be released on his executing a bond, with or without sureties, to appear before a Magistrate if so required; Provided that, if such person is not resident in India, the bond shall be secured by a surety or sureties resident in India.
(3) Should the true name and residence of such person not be ascertained within twenty-four hours from the time of arrest or should he fail to execute the bond, or, if so required, to furnish sufficient sureties, he shall forthwith be forwarded to the nearest Magistrate having jurisdiction.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 42(1) CrPC
This sub-section empowers a police officer to arrest someone without a warrant if that person commits or is accused of a minor (non-cognizable) offence in their presence, and then refuses to provide their name and address, or provides false details, to enable the police to confirm their identity.
Section 42(2) CrPC
This sub-section mandates that once the true identity and address of an arrested person are confirmed, they must be released. This release is conditional upon them signing a bond, potentially with sureties, committing to appear before a Magistrate if instructed.
Landmark Judgements
Om Prakash v. State of Haryana (2007):
The Punjab and Haryana High Court clarified that the power to arrest under Section 42 CrPC is strictly conditional. It can only be exercised when a person, in the presence of a police officer, commits or is accused of committing a non-cognizable offence and subsequently refuses to provide their name and residence, or gives information believed to be false. The primary purpose of such arrest is solely to ascertain the person’s identity, and not for punishment.
Satyavrat Sharma v. State of NCT of Delhi (2009):
The Delhi High Court reiterated that the prerequisites for an arrest under Section 42 CrPC are that the non-cognizable offence must have been committed in the presence of the police officer, and the person must either refuse to disclose their identity or provide information believed to be false. The court emphasized that these conditions are mandatory for a lawful arrest under this section.
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014):
While not exclusively on Section 42, the Supreme Court laid down extensive guidelines to prevent unnecessary arrests, particularly for offences where the maximum punishment is less than seven years. This judgment reinforces the principle that police officers must be satisfied that an arrest is necessary and justified, even in specific circumstances like those outlined in Section 42 CrPC, before depriving an individual of their liberty.