Specific remand order required for continued custody after adjournment; mechanical warrant endorsement is insufficient.

Continued custody after committal or adjournment is lawful only if the court passes a specific remand order after applying its mind to the circumstances. Mere fixation of a future date for appearance or a mechanical endorsement on the custody warrant does not satisfy Sections 209 and 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The note links this requirement to the constitutional safeguards of personal liberty and fair procedure under Articles 14, 21 and 22, and states that absence of a proper remand order renders detention illegal and supports release on bail.

---

---

Issues: Whether detention of the accused was illegal in the absence of a specific remand order under Sections 209 and 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether such illegality entitled the accused to bail.

Analysis: The Court held that where an accused is brought before the Magistrate or Sessions Court and his custody is continued, the Court must pass a remand order by applying its mind to the relevant circumstances. Mere fixation of a future date for appearance or a mechanical signing of the custody warrant is not sufficient. The remand requirement under Section 209 operates at the stage of commitment, and once the trial is postponed or adjourned after commencement, Section 309(2) requires a fresh remand by warrant if further custody is to be maintained. This interpretation was reinforced by the constitutional guarantees of personal liberty and fair procedure under Articles 14, 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India.

Conclusion: The absence of specific remand orders on the relevant dates rendered the detention illegal, and the accused was entitled to be released on bail.

Ratio Decidendi: Continued custodial detention after commitment or adjournment of trial is lawful only when the Court passes a specific, reasoned remand order applying its mind; mere endorsement on a warrant or fixing a date does not satisfy Sections 209 and 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

---