State Commission cannot issue warrant of arrest for execution of its order under Section 71

Calcutta High Court Quashes Illegal Arrest Order in Consumer Dispute Case. Court Upholds Rights Under Consumer Protection Act, Directs Immediate Release of Petitioner

In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court has set aside orders of arrest and judicial remand issued by the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, West Bengal against Malay Bose in connection with a consumer complaint case. The orders dated 04.09.2025 and 03.11.2025 were deemed illegal for misapplying sections of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, leading to Bose's immediate release from judicial custody.

The petitioner, Malay Bose, had been arrested following a warrant issued by the Commission for non-compliance with its order regarding the handover of a flat and payment of compensation and refund. The Commission had refused to consider Bose's medical documents and remanded him to custody for ten days, prompting a legal challenge.

Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J., presiding over the case, emphasized that sections 71 and 72 of the Consumer Protection Act offer mutually exclusive remedies for enforcing Commission orders. Section 71 allows for enforcement as a civil decree, while section 72 provides quasi-criminal sanctions. The Commission's attempt to use coercive methods under section 72 without proper proceedings was ruled unlawful.

The judgment elaborated that coercive measures such as arrest and judicial remand require initiation of proceedings treating non-compliance as an "offence," ensuring adherence to principles of natural justice. The court stressed that the Commission acted beyond its jurisdiction by usurping powers of a Judicial Magistrate and failed to provide a fair opportunity for Bose to defend himself.

The ruling referenced previous judgments, including Abdul Mani Molla v. State of W.B., reiterating that a commission cannot issue arrest warrants for execution under section 71, but can act under section 72 only after initiating proper proceedings.

The court exercised its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process and secure justice, leading to the quashing of the impugned orders and Bose's release from custody. The judgment underscored the importance of fair, just, and reasonable procedures in compliance with constitutional mandates under Article 21.

The decision is a reminder of the importance of adhering to due process in consumer disputes and reinforces the legal rights available to parties under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Bottom Line:

Commission cannot issue warrant of arrest for execution of its order under Section 71 - Judicial remand for coercive compliance of an order under Section 72 requires initiation of a proceeding treating non-compliance as an "offence" and adherence to principles of natural justice.

Statutory provision(s): Consumer Protection Act, 2019 - Section 71, Section 72; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482

Malay Bose v. Susmita Saha, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2810123