Section 41-A notice compliance governs lawful arrest; unlawful detention violating Article 21 justified immediate release.

Non-compliance with the Section 41-A CrPC notice requirement rendered the arrest unlawful where the record did not show any lawful refusal of service or any factual basis for immediate arrest. The Bombay HC held that the material before it failed to establish a legally sustainable ground for detention, especially when appearance had been indicated for a later date. Continued detention was therefore contrary to law and violated Article 21 of the Constitution, and the detenue was directed to be released forthwith in habeas corpus jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention and arrest of the petitioner's husband were lawful in the absence of compliance with the notice under Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether he was entitled to release in a habeas corpus petition.

Analysis: The notice and contemporaneous record did not show a lawful refusal to accept service or any factual basis justifying immediate arrest. The material placed before the Court did not demonstrate compliance with the mandate of Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the arrest was inconsistent with the stated requirement of appearance on a later date. In these circumstances, the continued detention was held to be contrary to law and violative of personal liberty protected by Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Conclusion: The detention was unlawful and the petitioner's husband was directed to be released forthwith.

Ratio Decidendi: Arrest made without lawful compliance with the notice requirement under Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and without a legally sustainable basis, amounts to illegal detention infringing Article 21 of the Constitution of India and warrants immediate release in habeas corpus jurisdiction.

---