Criminal remand under Section 309(2) can continue before formal cognizance if inquiry has commenced and custody remains continuous.

Section 309(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure permits remand during an inquiry or trial, and the inquiry stage may begin once a complaint or police report is filed and the court applies its mind to the material. Taking cognizance is not a mandatory recorded formality in every case, and the scheme of the Code preserves continuity of custody from investigation to the stage when the trial court assumes remand control. Accordingly, the absence or delay of formal cognizance does not by itself make further remand illegal or justify release on that ground. The application for release failed, and the trial court was directed to decide cognizance expeditiously.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused's custody and remand orders were illegal on the ground that, after filing of the complaint, the Special Court had not yet taken cognizance and therefore could not authorise further remand under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Analysis: Section 309(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure permits remand in an inquiry or trial, and the stage of inquiry may commence once the complaint or police report is filed and the court applies its mind to the material placed before it. Taking cognizance is not a formal ritual and does not require a recorded order in every case. The scheme of the Code maintains continuity of custody: the accused remains in the custody of the Magistrate after completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet or complaint until cognizance is taken by the court trying the offence, whereafter the court assumes custody for remand purposes during trial. The filing of the complaint within time satisfies the statutory scheme, and the absence or delay of cognizance does not by itself create a right to release on the ground that further remand is unavailable.

Conclusion: The remand orders were not illegal merely because cognizance had not yet been taken, and the request for release on that ground was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The application failed, and the trial court was directed to decide the question of cognizance expeditiously.

Ratio Decidendi: Filing of the complaint or charge-sheet preserves the continuity of custody, and remand may continue in accordance with Section 309(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure even before formal cognizance is taken, so long as the proceedings are at the inquiry stage.

---