Producing An Accused Before Magistrate Beyond 24 Hrs Without Obtaining Any Transit Warrant Is Violative Of Article 22(2) Constitution: Telangana HC

The Court set aside the remand order clarifying that a subsequent remand order made by the Magistrate would not legalise the prior detention which was against the constitutional and legal mandate.

A Single Bench of Justice E.V. Venugopal observed, “As such, producing the petitioner/A2 before the Magistrate beyond 24 hours without obtaining any transit warrant is considered as a violative of Article 22(2) of the Constitution and in that view of the matter, the petitioner/A2 is entitled to be released by setting aside the impugned order. However, it is made clear that the entitlement of the petitioner to be released is only due to the procedural flaw on the part of the prosecuting agency in producing him before the nearest judicial Magistrate within the stipulated timeframe of 24 hours but not based on the merits of the case.”

Advocate Yemmiganur Soma Srinath Reddy appeared for the petitioner, while Assistant Public Prosecutor S. Madhav represented the respondent

The petitioner filed an application under Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC to challenge the remand order of the Magistrate. The petitioner submitted that he was falsely implicated in the case under Sections 420, 406 and 409 of the IPC without his involvement. He stated that he was arrested against the constitutional provisions and fundamental rights under Article 22(2) of the Constitution and Section 57 of the Cr.P.C.

The Court stated that personal liberty being one of the “cherished objects of the Indian Constitution” can only be deprived in accordance with law and in conformity with the provisions thereof, as stipulated under Article 21 of the Constitution.

“Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India and also Section 57 Cr.P.C., require that person arrested or detained in custody should be produced before the nearest Magistrate within 24 hours of such arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Court of the Magistrate, and that no such person should be detained beyond such period without the authority of the Magistrate,” the Court observed.

The Court explained that a cautious reading of Section 167(1) of the Cr.P.C. made it clear that the officer in-charge of the police station or the investigating officer can ask for remand only when there were grounds to believe that the accusation or information was well founded and it appeared that the investigation could be completed within the period of twenty-four hours as specified under Section 57 of the Cr.P.C.

“Further, except stating that due to late night confessional statement of the accused could not be completed, no plausible explanation is offered by the investigating officer to give leverage or support to the delay occurred in production of the accused before the Magistrate concerned,” the Court noted.

Consequently, the Court set aside the remand order and directed the accused to be set at liberty by granting bail.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition.

Cause Title: Guntupalli Srinivas Rao v. The State of Telangana

Click here to read/download the Order