CASE BRIEFTaking into account rampant abuse of the provisions of Section 498A of the IPC and punishment granted under section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the Supreme Court granting leave to petitioner in Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar, laid down guidelines acting to serve the interest of the accused against arrest without warrant while defining the powers and duties of police against automatic arrest or detention under said provisions. Courts guidelines emphasize upon freedom from arbitrary arrest/detention via due process of law. Police officers must have a checklist of conditions to be fulfilled under s. 41(1)(b)(ii), with reasons and materials supporting arrest, to be sent to Magistrate, for further perusal and subsequent authorization of detention if at all. Alternatively, in case of no arrest, with reasons recorded in writing, Magistrate should be intimated within two weeks of institution of case. If arrest under s.41 is not required then s. 41A, states that issuance of notice by the police to accused directing his presence at a time and place, and his subsequent compliance protects him from arrest unless for reasons to be recorded in writing, the police opinionate that arrest is necessary. In Dowry cases where punishment can be up to 2 to 3 years maximum, aforesaid provisions ensure that despite the dubious reputation of s.498A and the like, due procedure protects both the victim and the wrongly accused. Guidelines ensure that non-compliance will impose penalty via departmental action against erring police officers. In pith and core, s.489A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, r/w sections 41(1)(b)(ii) and section 41A of Cr.P.C. acts as a deterrent for police officers against automatic arrest and in genuine cases protects wrongly accused against harassment and humiliation, and only upon the fulfillment of the CONDITONS PRECEDENT can arrest be made without warrant. Section 41 (1) (b), for cognizable offences punishable with less than or up to seven years imprisonment with or without fine enumerates that, upon reasonable cause, suspicion, credible information against accused, police officers should arrest after being satisfied of conditions precedent, to be followed if it is to prevent any further commission of offence, to conduct investigation, to prevent any undue influence or threat against witnesses which would dissuade them from furnishing information to court or officers or deliberate tampering/disappearing of evidence and if arrest is the only way to ensure presence of accused in the Court.