Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 · Chapter V: Arrest of Persons
Section 41A: Notice of appearance before police officer
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
In plain words
Where arrest is not required under section 41, the police officer must issue a notice asking the person suspected of a cognizable offence to appear before them. The person must comply, and if they do, they cannot be arrested unless the officer records reasons for needing to arrest them.
- If the person fails to comply or refuses to identify themselves, the officer can arrest them, subject to any court orders.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Read the in-depth explanation, with key Supreme Court rulings ↓
Official text
(1) [The police officer shall], in all cases where the arrest of a person is not required under the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 41, issue a notice directing the person against whom a reasonable complaint has been made, or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists that he has committed a cognizable offence, to appear before him or at such other place as may be specified in the notice.
(2) Where such a notice is issued to any person, it shall be the duty of that person to comply with the terms of the notice.
(3) Where such person complies and continues to comply with the notice, he shall not be arrested in respect of the offence referred to in the notice unless, for reasons to be recorded, the police officer is of the opinion that he ought to be arrested. [(4) Where such person, at any time, fails to comply with the terms of the notice or is unwilling to identify himself, the police officer may, subject to such orders as may have been passed by a competent Court in this behalf, arrest him for the offence mentioned in the notice.]
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Understanding this section
Section 41A requires the police, where arrest is not required under section 41(1), to issue a notice of appearance instead. As long as the person complies, he is not to be arrested unless the officer records reasons why arrest has become necessary.
How it works
- The officer must issue a notice in all cases where arrest is not required under section 41(1).
- The person must comply and appear as directed.
- While he complies, he cannot be arrested except for recorded reasons.
- If he fails to comply or refuses to identify himself, he may be arrested, subject to court orders.
Mandatory, not optional
The words were changed in 2010 from may to shall. Issuing a notice is the default for offences where arrest is not necessary, especially those punishable up to seven years.
Consequences of breach
Non-compliance with sections 41 and 41A entitles the accused to bail, and the Supreme Court has directed States to frame standing orders for section 41A procedure.
Key Supreme Court rulings
Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation 2022 INSC 690
All States and Union Territories were directed to frame standing orders to comply with section 41A, to curb unwarranted arrests and the clogging of courts with bail applications.
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar 2014 INSC 463
Where arrest is not required under section 41(1), the police must issue a notice under section 41A; a person complying with it should not be arrested save for recorded reasons.
Common mistakes
- Treating the notice as discretionary.
- Arresting a person who is complying with the notice without recording reasons.
Read with: Section 41 CrPC, Section 35 BNSS
Prepared with AI assistance as a study aid. Every ruling listed was checked against the Supreme Court's own judgments on this site, and quoted words appear in those judgments; linked names open the full judgment. Read the judgments themselves before relying on them. Not legal advice.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 41A
-
Tuhin Kumar Biswas @ Bumba v. The State of West Bengal
The Revision Petition filed by the Appellant-accused against the order dismissing the discharge application filed by the Appellant in FIR No.50/2020 dated 19.03.2020 lodged with police station Bidhannagar North, was…
-
Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Another
Whether in each and every case, even arising out of an offence under Penal Code, 1860 now Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 would it be necessary to furnish grounds of arrest to an accused either before arrest or forthwith…
-
Mala Choudhary & Anr. v. State of Telangana & Anr.
Issue arose as to correctness of the order passed by the High Court dismissing the petition filed by the appellants, seeking quashing of FIR.
-
Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.
Issue arose as to whether the usage of electronic communication can also be extended to the procedure governing the service of a notice, contemplated u/s.35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
-
Geddam Jhansi & Anr. v. The State of Telangana & Ors.
Whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant(s) under Sections 498A, 506, Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961; Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ought to be…
-
Dara Lakshmi Narayana & Others v. State of Telangana & Another
In the facts and circumstances of the case and after examining the FIR, whether the High Court was correct in refusing to quash the ongoing criminal proceedings against the appellants under Section 498A of the IPC and…
-
Sonu Agnihotri v. Chandra Shekhar & Ors.
The appellant-Judicial Officer has preferred these appeals for expunging adverse findings/remarks recorded against him in the impugned order dated 02.03.2023 by the Delhi High Court.
-
Somjeet Mallick v. State of Jharkhand & Others
Whether the High Court was justified in quashing the FIR, the cognizance order and the proceedings in pursuance thereof without considering the materials collected during investigation.
-
Arvind Kejriwal v. Central Bureau of Investigation
The instant appeals are directed against the judgments and orders dated 05.08.2024 passed by the High Court, dismissing the appellant’s challenge to his arrest being illegal as well as his application for the grant of…
-
Shajan Skaria v. The State of Kerala & Anr.
Whether Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 imposes an absolute bar on the grant of anticipatory bail in cases registered under the said Act; when can it be said…
-
Tusharbhai Rajnikantbhai Shah v. Kamal Dayani & Ors.
Accused-petitioner was granted absolute interim protection of anticipatory bail by Supreme Court, until modified or altered upon final disposal of the present SLP which was pending consideration before this Court.…
-
Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.
The Amicus submitted report dated 10.02.2024 indicating the directions that have been complied with by the parties in terms of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil**. On basis of the said…
-
Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka and Ors.
Whether the power of the High Court or the Court of Session to grant anticipatory bail u/s 438 CrPC could be exercised with respect to an FIR registered outside the territorial jurisdict ion of the said Court; and…
- Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty & Anr. v. Union
-
Ameena Begum v. The State of Telangana
An order of detention dated 24.03.2023 was passed by the Commissioner of Police against appellant’ s husband. Whether the alleged acts of commission for which the Detenu has been kept under detention are prejudicial to…
-
Mohammad Wajid and Anr. v. State of U.P.
In the instant case wherein FIR was registered u/ss. 395, 504, 506 and 323 IPC against the appellants, the questions which arose for consideration are whether the said case falls within the parameters laid down for…
- V. Senthil Balaji v. The State Represented by
- Md. Asfak Alam v. The State of Jharkhand & Anr.
- The State of Gujarat Etc. v. Choodamani
- Central Bureau of Investigation v. Santosh
- Ms. X v. The State of Maharashtra and Another
- Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
- Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors
- Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.
- Vinod Dua v. Union of India & Ors.
- Patricia Mukhim v. State of Meghalaya & Ors.
- Ravuri Krishna Murthy v. The State of Telangana and Others
- Union of India v. Ashok Kumar Sharma and Others
- Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecological Societies of India (Fogsi) v. Union of India and Others
- Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and Another v. Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and Others
- The State of Maharashtra & Ors. v. Tasneem Rizwan Siddiquee
- Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India and Others
- Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr.
- Rajesh Sharma & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
- Dr. Rini Johar & Anr. v. State of M.P. & Ors.
- Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar & Anr.
- Km. Hema Mishra v. State of U.P. and Others
- Sushil Sharma v. The State of N.C.T. of Delhi