Inter-state arrest safeguards: alleged procedural non-compliance led to interim protection and production directions.

Alleged inter-state arrest without prior intimation to the local police, compliance with the arrest protocol, or communication of the grounds of arrest raised a prima facie concern of procedural irregularity. The Court noted that the chronology suggested the petitioner may have been picked up before the relevant information was recorded in Uttar Pradesh, and that no prior notice had been given to the Delhi Police. Applying the established inter-state arrest safeguards, the Court found the prescribed procedure had not apparently been followed and granted interim protection by directing production of the petitioner before the Court if he was not released on bail by the Magistrate, together with preservation and production of available CCTV footage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the alleged inter-state arrest of the petitioner, without prior intimation to the local police, without compliance with the prescribed arrest protocol, and without communication of the grounds of arrest, warranted interim habeas corpus relief and directions for production of the petitioner.

Analysis: The Court noted that the status report and the FIR chronology raised a prima facie concern that the petitioner had been picked up before the police station in Uttar Pradesh recorded the relevant information, and that no prior information had been given to the Delhi Police. The Court also relied on the established inter-state arrest protocol, which requires prior permission, proper recording of reasons, coordination with local police, observance of arrest safeguards, and prompt production before the competent Magistrate. On the materials placed, the Court found that the prescribed procedure had not apparently been followed and that the grounds of arrest also did not appear to have been communicated at the time of arrest.

Conclusion: The Court granted interim protection by directing that, if the petitioner was not released on bail by the concerned Magistrate, he be produced before the Court on the next day, and by directing preservation and production of available CCTV footage.

---