Analysis of Decisions of the Higher Judiciary on Arrest and Detention in Bangladesh Court Division issued a Rule against the RAB to show cause as to why they should not be directed to ensure the safety and security of persons detained in the RAB’s custody.14 Despite the High Court’s ruling, the use of torture in custody of the RAB continues unabated as most of the incidents are not challenged in court due to the official impunity they enjoy. The survey of this case and other judicial decisions reveals that the following broad issues can be identified: Interpretation of ‘ Reasonable suspicion: Under section 54 of Cr. P. C., a police officer can arrest any person who has been concerned in any cognisable offence, against whom credible information has been received or against whom a reasonable suspicion exists of having been so concerned in any cognisable offence. Here the words ‘concerned’ and ‘credible’ or ‘reasonable’ information under section 54 of the Cr. P.C. are frequently invoked as grounds for police arrest without warrant. But in the absence of guidelines as to what constitutes ‘concerned; ‘credible’ or ‘reasonable information’, the section provides ample scope for misuse. The judiciary scrutinized the meaning of ‘concerned’ ‘credible’ or ‘reasonable information’ in several pronouncements. In Saifuzzaman vs. State15 the Supreme Court held that what is a “reasonable suspicion” must depend upon the 14 15 Ibid, p. 50. 56 DLR 324 31