Habeas corpus cannot lie against custody under a subsisting remand order; adverse remarks against police officials were expunged.

A writ of habeas corpus is not maintainable where the person is in police custody under a subsisting judicial remand order passed by the competent Magistrate during an ongoing investigation, because such detention is lawful unless the remand order itself is challenged; the direction for release was therefore set aside. Strong adverse remarks against police officials, made without giving them a proper opportunity to explain and despite the operative remand order, were unwarranted and were expunged. The investigating agency remained free to proceed in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a writ of habeas corpus can be issued where the person is in police custody pursuant to a subsisting remand order passed by the jurisdictional Magistrate; (ii) Whether the strong and scathing observations made against the police officials ought to be expunged.

Issue (i): Whether a writ of habeas corpus can be issued where the person is in police custody pursuant to a subsisting remand order passed by the jurisdictional Magistrate.

Analysis: A writ of habeas corpus is not maintainable when the person is in custody under an operative judicial order of remand passed by the competent Magistrate in connection with an ongoing criminal investigation. The custody in such a case is not one of continued illegal detention but custody authorised by a lawful remand order. In the absence of any challenge to the remand order itself, the High Court could not have proceeded on a habeas corpus petition to direct release on the footing that the detention was unlawful.

Conclusion: The issue is answered against the respondent and in favour of the appellant. No writ of habeas corpus could be issued on the facts of the case.

Issue (ii): Whether the strong and scathing observations made against the police officials ought to be expunged.

Analysis: The adverse remarks were made without affording the concerned police officials a proper opportunity to explain the factual position. Since the custody was under a judicial remand then in force, the police officers could not be criticised as if they had acted wholly without authority. Strong comments against investigating officers, made without adequate opportunity and in a matter where the remand order was not under challenge, were unwarranted.

Conclusion: The issue is answered in favour of the appellant. The remarks made against the police officials were liable to be expunged.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the direction issuing habeas corpus was set aside, and the adverse observations against the police officials were removed, while leaving the investigating agency free to proceed in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Habeas corpus cannot be granted against a person held under a subsisting judicial remand order, and adverse judicial remarks against officials should not be made without affording them an opportunity of explanation.

---