However, before Mr A was detained, the offender's uncle, Mr B, approached the officer.
According to the officer, Mr B began to yell and pushed the officer from behind. Mr B denies this recollection.
The officer says he then told the man to move away or face arrest. The man initially complied, but then pushed the officer in the chest and became verbally abusive, the officer said.
Believing Mr B was becoming a threat, the officer then informed him he, too, was under arrest.
At this point the officer says he was "sandwiched" between both men he intended to arrest, and determined he was unable to deploy his pepper spray, instead choosing to utilise "closed-hand tactics".
The officer says he then punched Mr B in the "jaw area", and the two began to exchange blows. At one point in the struggle, the officer struck the offender in the head with his knee.
Eventually, the officer stepped away from the confrontation and drew his pepper spray, which resulted in the offender running back into the house.
The officer sprayed the substance through an open window, unsure if it would have any effect.
Finding all entrances locked, the officer then broke the glass in the front door to gain entry. Mr B was found to have escaped, while Mr A was found in the living room and arrested on the original charge of breaching his bail.
Mr B was located the next day at a different address and later pleaded guilty to aggravated assault, also apologising to the officer.
Officer's force justified - IPCA
Responding to the complaint, the IPCA found the officer's use of force against the man was justified in the circumstances.
While the authority acknowledges that accounts of the altercation differ, it concludes that Mr B was being obstructive and that this appears to be acknowledged in his letter of apology.
"It seems unlikely that [the officer] could have withdrawn from the situation, as we accept he was in between and in close proximity to [Mr A] and [Mr B]," the authority said.
"We therefore accept that the single punch to Mr B's face to repel his attack was reasonable in the circumstances."
Responding to the findings, Central District Commander Superintendent Scott Fraser said he was comfortable with his officer's actions.
"This was a clear situation when the officer was put at risk. His actions were consistent with relative policy and both justified and lawful."