HC declares arrest of music producer Pinky Dhaliwal illegal, raps Punjab Police for violating constitutional rights 

In a major embarrassment for Punjab Police, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has declared the arrest of music producer Pushpinder Pal Singh Dhaliwal, also known as Pinky Dhaliwal, illegal, while citing serious violations of constitutional and procedural safeguards.

Justice Harpreet Singh Brar held that Dhaliwal’s detention by Mataur police in Mohali was in "direct contravention of Article 21" of the Constitution and an "incurable illegality" that vitiated the entire proceedings against him.

The court found that Dhaliwal was subjected to custodial interrogation even before an FIR was registered against him. Referring to official records, the court noted that he was picked up from his residence at 7:30 pm on March 8 under the pretext of questioning. A daily diary report entry was recorded at 7:48 pm upon his arrival at Mataur police station, but the FIR was not lodged against him at that stage.

Justice Brar noted that officials failed to provide a copy of the FIR or the arrest memo when the Warrant Officer arrived at the police station. It was only at 2:26 pm on March 9 that the Station House Officer handed over a copy of the FIR along with a DDR, the memo of personal search, and the memo of arrest. The Warrant Officer’s report further indicated that both the personal search and arrest memos were signed —along with the witnesses and the detainee — only at 2:30 AM.

Holding that the detention was "illegal in the eyes of law," Justice Brar referred to "total non-compliance" with Section 47 of BNSS and a violation of Article 22 of the Constitution. The Bench observed that Dhaliwal was informed of the grounds of his arrest only after a lapse of seven hours, that too in the presence of the Warrant Officer. Such procedural lapses, the court asserted, were in "clear contravention of the principles laid down in Supreme Court’s judgment in Vihaan Kumar’s case."

The Bench also took note of the fact that the police only registered the FIR and issued the arrest memo after the Warrant Officer’s arrival, terming it a "deliberate attempt" to obscure procedural irregularities and justify their illegal actions.

“The subsequent registration of the FIR and the issuance of the arrest memo only after the arrival of the Warrant Officer appear to be a deliberate attempt by police officials to obscure procedural irregularities and justify their illegal actions,” Justice Brar asserted.

The court observed that the police failed to comply with Section 35(3) of BNSS, which mandates the issuance of a notice before arrest. Instead, the police proceeded directly to arrest Dhaliwal, violating Section 35(1)(c), which lays down twin conditions for making an arrest in cases punishable with imprisonment exceeding seven years—there must be credible information that the accused has committed a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment of more than seven years; and the police officer must have reason to believe, based on such credible information, that the accused has committed the offence.

"No reasons were recorded by the police to establish that the information received was credible or that the arrest of the detainee was necessary," Justice Brar asserted, while allowing the habeas corpus petition. The court ordered Dhaliwal’s "immediate release" unless required in connection with another case. before parting with the case, Justice Brar asserted: "Consequently, the arrest of the detainee in connection with FIR stands vitiated and is declared illegal."