Legal Provisions of Section 221 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Intentional omission to apprehend on the part of public servant bound to apprehend:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
This section penalises a public servant who intentionally omits to apprehend or keep in confinement any person even though he is legally bound to do so. It says that whoever, being a public servant, legally bound as such either to apprehend, or to keep in confinement any person who is either charged with an offence or who is liable to be apprehended for an offence, either intentionally omits to apprehend such person, or intentionally suffers such persons to escape, or intentionally aids such person in escaping or attempting to escape from such confinement, shall be punished with simple or rigorous imprisonment for a term extending up to seven years, with or without fine, if such person in confinement, or who ought to have been charged with or liable to be apprehended for, an offence punishable with death; or with simple or rigorous imprisonment for a term extending up to three years, with or without fine with respect to a person as stated above for an offence punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment extending up to ten years; or with simple or rigorous imprisonment for a term extending up to two years, with or without fine, with respect to a person as stated above for an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term less than ten years.
The section requires that the public servant in that capacity must be legally bound to apprehend or to keep in confinement any such person as stated in the provision. The omission to apprehend, or suffering to escape, or aiding or attempting to escape has to be intentional failing which the section shall not apply.
Image Source: cdn.shareyouressays.com
Where a judicial magistrate remanded a suspect in a criminal case to police custody but the court ‘moharrir’, who was duty bound to execute the order, instead directed the police escort to release him, it was held by the Supreme Court that his conviction under section 221 of the Code was valid. Where a dafadar, or a chowkidar, arrested a person accused of violating the law, but allowed him to escape, it was held that he was guilty under this section because even though he was not a police officer within the meaning of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he was duty bound to keep him under arrest under the Bihar and Orissa Village Administration Act.
The offence under this section is non-cognizable, bailable and non-compoundable, and is triable by magistrate of the first class.