Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner's detention beyond 24 hours, after complete restraint by customs officers, violated Article 21 and Article 22(2) of the Constitution and entitled him to bail.
Analysis: The petitioner was apprehended in the early hours of 2 November 1991, the seizure panchnama and statement were recorded the same morning, and no formal arrest memorandum or other document showed a later lawful arrest. The Court found that the petitioner was under total restraint from 5.30 a.m. on 2 November 1991 and was produced before the Magistrate only on 4 November 1991, far beyond the constitutional limit of 24 hours. The Court held that this unexplained delay amounted to a clear breach of Article 21 and Article 22(2) of the Constitution, and also noted breach of Section 57 and Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Court declined to base the decision on the other objections regarding habitual panch witnesses and alleged non-compliance with Sections 42 to 57 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Conclusion: The detention was unconstitutional and illegal, and the petitioner was entitled to bail.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an accused is under complete custody and control of investigating officers, arrest is complete in law from the point of total restraint, and detention beyond 24 hours without production before a Magistrate violates Article 22(2) and Article 21 of the Constitution.