Short answer. Yes, but only under conditions. Rule 113 allows an officer making an arrest — by warrant, or a lawful warrantless arrest — to break into a building or enclosure where the person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to be, but only after announcing his authority and purpose and being refused admittance.
What the law says
may break into any building or enclosure where the person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to be, if he is refused admittance thereto, after announcing his authority and purpose
Rule 113, Section 11 — Right of officer to break into building or enclosure. Read the full provision →
The conditions, in the rule's own order
Rule 113, Section 11 authorises forcible entry only when each element is present. The officer must be making an arrest either by virtue of a warrant, or without a warrant as provided in section 5 of the same Rule — the recognised situations of lawful warrantless arrest. The person to be arrested must be inside, or the officer must reasonably believe they are: the rule speaks of a building or enclosure where the person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to be. And entry by force comes last, if he is refused admittance thereto, after announcing his authority and purpose. Breaking in is the final step of a sequence, not the opening move.
Announce first, then be refused
The order of the final two conditions matters. The officer must first announce authority and purpose — who he is and that he is there to make an arrest — and must then be refused admittance. Only that refusal unlocks the power to break in. The requirement is not an empty courtesy: it gives the occupants the chance to open the door and lets the arrest happen without destruction or confrontation. An entry that skips the announcement, or that treats a pause as a refusal, departs from the very text that makes the entry lawful.
The power is tied to the arrest, not the house
What the section authorises is entry in order to make an arrest. It is the person, not the premises, that the officers are entitled to. The rule is not a search authority — it does not convert an arrest into a licence to rummage through the home, and whatever officers may lawfully do once inside is governed by the rules on searches and seizures, not by this section. Note also that the building need not be the arrestee's own: the rule reaches any building or enclosure where the person is reasonably believed to be, including someone else's.
If it happens to your home
In the moment, do not resist — resistance creates new legal problems that outlast the entry. Instead, observe and record what the shape of the entry was: whether officers announced themselves and what they said, whether anyone refused them entry, whether a warrant was shown and for whom, and what was done inside beyond taking the person arrested. Those facts, fixed while fresh, are what a lawyer needs to evaluate whether the entry followed the section — and what remedies follow if it did not. The place to contest an unlawful entry is before a court, afterward, with the details intact.