The introduction of crucial protective measures concerning arrests made under the jurisdiction of GST and the Customs Acts has been issued by the Supreme Court. However, Justice Bela M Trivedi explained that courts ought not to scrutinise too deeply the petty mistakes committed by officers during an arrest. Over-involvement in probing, as she put it, can damage the system and provide leniency to criminals.
Judicial Oversight With Caution
Justice Trivedi accepted the importance of protecting fundamental rights but cautioned that excessive judicial interventions can undermine law enforcement. She stated that during the execution of critical enactments such as the PMLA, UAPA, and the GST Acts, too much court interference may obstruct investigations and assist in the designs of the offenders.
Why Arrests Under Special Laws Are Important?
Money laundering, tax evasion, and financial fraud are criminal activities which are harmful to society as a whole, not just to specific individuals. Justice Trivedi observed that arrest under these laws is helpful in:
-
Gaining access to critical information and evidence.
-
Preventing tampering with evidence.
-
Safeguarding the witnesses.
-
Preserving peace.
Judicial Review Should Be Limited
When it comes to ensuring that proper procedures are followed about arrests, the courts need to maintain a careful balance with the officer’s discretion. Justice Trivedi articulated:
-
Courts need to verify whether the arresting officer had requisite legal authority.
-
The officer had sufficient information which justified the suspicion that the individual was guilty.
-
The accused was apprised of the grounds for his arrest.
-
Nevertheless, courts ought not to decide if the particular evidence was adequate before the arrest was executed.
Serious Crimes Need Strict Laws
Fraud and financial crimes can directly affect a country’s security and economic productivity. Justice Trivedi stated that the courts need to be cautious when interpreting strict laws, as being lenient can create a problem with enforcement. She emphasised that such laws do exist as they are necessary to address severe crimes, and these laws are unfortunately oftentimes ineffectively enforced due to their vague interpretation.
Conclusion
Justice Trivedi remarked that review is permissible only where there is a conspicuous infringement of the legal safeguards. The courts should not intervene in investigations unless it is necessary. The objective is to ensure that people’s liberties are protected without compromising the prosecution of serious offenders.
Join the conversation and stay informed! Visit the Jaagruk Bharat community page and be part of an active, engaged community as we work day and night to bring information to your fingertips.
