Chapter VI
Section 70 CrPC: Form of warrant of arrest and duration
New Law Update (2024)
Section 79 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Punishment
Procedural – Warrant / Summons Process
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(1) Every warrant of arrest issued by a Court under this Code shall be in writing, signed by the presiding officer of such Court and shall bear the seal of the Court.
(2) Every such warrant shall remain in force until it is cancelled by the Court which issued it, or until it is executed.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 70(1)
This sub-section mandates that every warrant of arrest issued by a Court must be formally documented in writing, bear the signature of the presiding officer of that Court, and prominently display the Court’s official seal. These requirements are crucial for the warrant’s legal validity.
Section 70(2)
This part specifies that a warrant of arrest remains legally effective and enforceable either until the Court that issued it officially cancels it, or until the warrant has been successfully executed, meaning the person named therein has been apprehended.
Landmark Judgements
R.R. Chari v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1951 SC 207:
The Supreme Court, while interpreting provisions akin to Section 70 of the current CrPC, underscored the critical importance of a warrant being in proper form. It highlighted that a warrant must clearly specify the person to be arrested and the offence, and strict compliance with such procedural mandates is essential for its validity and lawful execution.
Sunil Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2020) SCC OnLine All 1106:
The Allahabad High Court emphatically reiterated the mandatory nature of the requirements outlined in Section 70(1) of the CrPC. The Court held that a warrant of arrest, fundamentally lacking the signature of the presiding officer or the official seal of the court, is inherently defective and legally invalid. Consequently, any arrest made pursuant to such a flawed warrant would be deemed unlawful.