Don’t arrest unsuspecting buyers of stolen phones, discharge those you arrested: Delhi Police officer’s order seeks to save innocents from legal hassle

A senior police officer has issued an order in two districts under his jurisdiction to ensure that people who unknowingly purchase stolen mobile phones are not arrested,

A senior police officer has issued an order in two districts under his jurisdiction to ensure that people who unknowingly purchase stolen mobile phones are not arrested, and those arrested in the past are discharged.

HT Image

Pointing out that “implicating” such innocent buyers in a criminal case is “not appropriate”, the order issued by Suvashish Chaudhary, joint commissioner of police (southern range), reasoned that such action threatened to derail the future and careers of innocent buyers of stolen mobile phones.

People who are found to be in possession of a stolen mobile phone are usually booked under Indian Penal Code 411 (dishonestly receiving stolen property), a non-bailable offence that carries a prison sentence of up to three years, a fine, or both.

“It has been seen that lately persons who have been arrested under IPC Section 411 are merely innocent buyers, who have, without knowledge of the consequences, been duped into buying cheap secondhand mobile phones,” Chaudhary said in his order.

While many senior police officers HT spoke to denied arresting innocent buyers, others acknowledged that they had little choice. “The law says that anyone found in possession of stolen property is to be booked and arrested. It is difficult to ascertain quickly whether a buyer was actually innocent or was trying to mislead us,” said a senior police officer under whose jurisdiction a prominent used phone market is.

“But if our initial probe makes it clear that the buyer really didn’t know the truth, we just implicate them instead of making an arrest. They then have to explain their situation to the court,” said the officer, who didn’t want to be identified.

While a person arrested needs to seek bail, those implicated are let off from police station after giving them assurances.

“If an offence doesn’t require us to arrest someone to seek a remand or make a recovery, or if the suspect is not a threat to the victims or the probe, and if the stipulated jail term is less than seven years, the officer on the ground can implicate them rather than arrest them. But they’ll have to make a court appearance,” explained a police officer.

These buyers are usually caught when the police, during their investigation of a stolen or snatched phone, track them down.

JCP Chaudhary said that a review of this situation in south and southeast districts in his jurisdiction suggested that innocent buyers were being booked and arrested. While he didn’t reveal any data, another police officer who didn’t want to be identified said that this figure ranged between 20% and 80% of the total number of buyers in different police stations.

“Mobile phones are not like stolen cars in which buyers know they need documents. Many used phone buyers are very poor people who end up buying stolen phones at cheap rates and without bills. These are people who wouldn’t have purchased these phones if they knew they were stolen goods,” said Chaudhary.

He said that apart from their careers being threatened by being booked and arrested, these buyers also ended up being stigmatised as they are considered as usual suspects when police look out for stolen phones,” said Chaudhary.

And by making such arrests, the police were not getting to the root of the problem, he said. “The investigating officer will have to discern between the actual receiver of the stolen phones and the unsuspecting buyers,” said Chaudhary.

It remained unclear whether the order would be replicated by officers of other districts. The joint CP of another range said that there was no need for this order. “The mandate is to arrest criminals only, not innocent people. So, we don’t need to issue an order,” the officer said, requesting anonymity.

But Vikram Singh, former DGP of Uttar Pradesh, welcomed the written order as a “humane step” and said that issuing such an order in writing would ensure transparency and would allow a cushion for innocent buyers to explain their case.

“Ignorance of the law is not an excuse and technically it is a crime to purchase a stolen phone, but this is a humane approach. The investigators need to apply their minds and put in the extra work to ensure they aren’t arresting innocent buyers,” said Vikram Singh.