|follow us on twitter||Follow @intolegalworld|
Manishek kumar singh, B.A. LL.B. City Law Academy College
“Hawaldaar sahab innhe hatkadi pehnaiye” the very common dialogue of Indian movies and daily soaps which is used in every scene in which the director wants to show some role of public authority. I am very friendly with it and hope that you are also doesn’t matter if you not. In my this contribution I am going to tell you that the handcuffs or the hathkadi has also its rules and regulation regarding its application.
It’s impossible to trace back through history to the very first appearance of Handcuff-like restraints. After all, as long as humankind has been around there has been the necessity to restrain some less than-savory characters. The first recorded mention of handcuffs appears in Virgil’s telling of the myth of Proteus, an ancient greek shape-shifting god.
The first metal handcuffs as we may recognize them today came into existence with the Bronze and Iron ages, and were “one size fits all” for centuries. This lack of adjustability according to wrist size posed a serious problem. Seeing it finally, in 1862, W.V.Adams patented the first adjustable ratchet design.
In 1879, Tower Handcuffs introduced the first double locking cuff design, which effectively solved this problem by preventing the Handcuffs from being ratcheted tighter. Afterwards in 1912 George Carney invented the first swing cuff which now the world use to see this design is revolutionary in nature as it made possible for law officer to quickly secure the cuffs.
The Peerless Handcuff Company, still the largest manufacturer of handcuffs today. It began selling these swing cuffs, and with the exception of brand variances and small changes.
- Are police officers required to handcuff every person placed under arrest?
There is no general rule of eligibility or requirement that a police officer must handcuff a person who is being arrested. When there is a question regarding handcuffing a person then at that time case laws has stated that the choice to handcuff a person is dependent on the surrounding circumstances, and that officers should always take the proper precautions to ensure the safety of themselves, and the public.
- In the case of Vishwa Nath Vs. State it was held by Justice R.N Agarwal
That a better class under trial be not handcuffed without recording the reasons in the daily diary for considering the necessity of the use of such a prisoner is being escorted to and from the court by the police, use of Handcuffs not reported unless there is a reasonable expectation that such offender may ran away from the custody.
- In the case of Citizen for democracy vs. State of Assam
It was held that where a person is arrested by the police without warrant and the Police officer is satisfied on the basis of the above guidelines that it is necessary to Handcuff such a person he may do so till the time he is taken to the police station and thereafter his production before the magistrate. Further use of fetters thereafter can only be under the orders of the magistrate. The magistrate may grant the permission to handcuff the prisoner in rare cases.
RIGHT AGAINST HANDCUFFING:-
- In the case of Prem Shankar vs. Delhi Administration
The Supreme Court added yet another projectile in its armory to be used against the war for prison reform and prisoners Rights. Handcuffing should be resorted to only when there is “clear and present danger of escape” breaking out the police control and for this there must be clear material, not merely an assumption.
- In the case of Sunil Gupta vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
The petitioners were educated persons and social workers, who were remanded to judicial custody, were taken to court from jail and back from the Court to the Prison by the Escort party handcuffed. They had staged a “dharna” for a public cause and voluntarily submitted themselves for arrest. They had no tendency to escape from jail. There was no reason recorded by the escort Party in writing for the inhuman act. The court directed the government to take appropriate action against the erring escort party for having unjustly and unreasonably hand cuffing the petitioners.
On the basis of the above cases mentioned and facts it become totally clear that if you are liable of Non-bail able offences even at that time Police cannot cuff your hands without the prior permission of Magistrate. So after reading this article I hope you all get understand that how laws are are liberal to us and even after doing an unlawful act.
In last I will conclude by mentioning a quote of Hon’ble Justice Krishna Iyer
“Handcuffing prima facie inhuman and, therefore, unreasonable, is overharsh and at the first flush, arbitrary, absent of fair procedure and objective monitoring, to inflict “irons” is to resort to zoological strategies repugnant to Art 21……”
 Cri. Misc. 430 of 1978
 (1995) 3 SCC 743
 AIR 1980 Sc 1535
 (1990) 3 SCC 119