Shankar Dayal Khare, J. - (1.) This is a criminal appeal from an order of acquittal and is pending before a learned single Judge of this Court. He has referred the following three questions for decision by a Division Bench of this Court - (1). Is the power of a private person Under Sec. 59 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to arrest another who, in the view of that person, commits a non -bailable and cognizable offence, confined to the time when or immediately after the said offence is committed and/or thereafter in the course of a pursuit undertaken immediately after commission of the offence, or extends to any time afterwards even though no such pursuit had been undertaken or if undertaken has been given up? (2). In case the answer to the aforesaid question is that the power extends to any time afterwards, even though no pursuit for arrest had been undertaken or, if undertaken, had been given up, is the exercise of such power limited by any considerations, or is unqualified? (3). If the exercise of such power is limited by any considerations, what is the nature of these considerations?
(2.) The facts of the case leading to this appeal might be briefly stated as follows. On 3 -5 -1963, Suresh Chandra (Respondent) had lodged a report at police station Hazaratganj, Lucknow, against the Appellant Vishwa Mitra Sharma Under Ss. 452/323 IPC. Six days later, i.e., on 9 -5 -1963, Suresh Chandra (Respondent) accompanied by certain other persons mat Vishwa Mitra Sharma (Appellant) just outside Haldaur railway station in the district of Bijnor. Suresh Chandra, with the help of certain other persons, arrested Vishwa Mitra Sharma and first he took him to his house and from there to police station Amhera and handed him over to the police after lodging a report and making it clear in his report why he, as a private citizen, had himself made that arrest. Vishwa Mitra Sharma initiated a counter action against Suresh Chandra and others Under Ss. 147/323/342 IPC challenging their right to arrest him and keep him in their custody. The question which has, therefore, arisen for consideration in the present appeal is whether Suresh Chandra, as a private citizen could exercise his powers Under Sec. 59 Code of Criminal Procedure six days after the cognizable offence, of which he was an eye -witness, had been committed.
(3.) Sec. 59 of Code of Criminal Procedure reads as follows - (1) Any private person may arrest any person who in his view commits a non -bailable and cognizable offence, or any proclaimed offender and without unnecessary delay, shall make over any person so arrested to a police officer, or in the absence of a police officer, take such person or cause him to be taken in custody to the nearest police station. (2) If there is reason to believe that such person comes under the provisions of Sec. 54, a police officer shall re -arrest him. (3) If there is reason to believe that he has committed a non -cognizable offence and he refuses on the demand of a police officer to give his name and residence, or gives a name or residence which such officer has reason to believe to be false, he shall be dealt with under the provisions of Sec. 57. If there is no sufficient reason to believe that he has committed any offence, he shall be at once released. It is clear from a perusal of this Sec. that its provisions enable a private person to arrest another who - (a) in his view commits a non -bailable and cognizable offence, or (b) is a proclaimed offender (Section 87 Code of Criminal Procedure).;