Magistrate's remand power after arrest under foreign exchange law upheld where the statute is silent on custody.

Under Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, the Magistrate retained power to remand a person arrested by the Enforcement Officer to judicial custody after production before him. The Court treated the arrest-and-production scheme as materially similar to the Customs Act, 1962, and held that statutory silence on post-production custody did not exclude the ordinary judicial power to decide remand. It reasoned that denying such power would make the arrest and production requirement ineffective. The contrary view was rejected, and the order refusing remand was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Magistrate has the power to remand a person arrested under Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 to judicial custody when produced before him by the Enforcement Officer.

Analysis: Section 35 empowered the Enforcement Officer to arrest and produce the arrested person before the Magistrate. The Court treated the corresponding provisions in the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 and the Customs Act, 1962 as identical in material effect and preferred the view that statutory silence on the Magistrate's custody powers did not exclude the ordinary judicial power to deal with the arrested person. The reasoning accepted that if the Magistrate had no such power, the arrest and production requirement would be rendered ineffective.

Conclusion: The Magistrate had the power to remand the arrested person to judicial custody, and the contrary view was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order refusing remand was set aside and the petition succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special statute authorises arrest and production before a Magistrate but does not regulate custody thereafter, the Magistrate retains the power to remand the arrested person to judicial custody.

---