Section 46

This rule continues a protection that existed in the old Code of Criminal Procedure (Section 49). It recognizes that arrest itself is a serious restriction on liberty, and that using excessive force, handcuffs, or chains adds unnecessary humiliation and physical harm beyond what the law intends. The idea is rooted in the constitutional promise of dignity (Article 21) — police power to arrest is not a license to degrade or torture.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly stressed that routine handcuffing is illegal and unconstitutional. In Prem Shankar Shukla v. Delhi Administration (1980), the Court held that handcuffing should be used only when there is a real risk of escape or violence, and even then, the arresting officer must record reasons in writing. In Citizens for Democracy v. State of Assam (1995), the Court reiterated that undertrials and prisoners cannot be handcuffed or chained as a matter of routine, and doing so without specific court permission and justification violates Article 21. These rulings treat this section (earlier Section 49 CrPC) as a statutory expression of the constitutional right to be treated with dignity even in custody.

• Myth: Police can handcuff any arrested person as a standard procedure.
  Fact: Courts have said handcuffing must be justified by a real risk of escape or violence, not used routinely or to humiliate.
• Myth: This section allows police unlimited force once someone is arrested.
  Fact: It does the opposite — it limits restraint to only what's necessary, protecting the arrested person's dignity.