Inter state arrest protocol non-compliance renders arrest prima facie unlawful and warrants evidence preservation and inquiry.

Inter state arrests must follow prescribed procedural protocol and statutory safeguards; the court found on the material before it that absence of prior intimation, missing arrest memos/diary entries, lack of recorded grounds at arrest and failure to comply with production requirements rendered the arrest prima facie unlawful, and so declared non compliant. The court ordered preservation and production of CCTV and medical/X ray evidence and directed the Commissioner of Police, Greater Noida, to file a status report identifying officers, vehicle details and protocol compliance, and to produce a senior police official; the petitioner was released.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the arrest and removal of the petitioner by Uttar Pradesh police from Delhi complied with the procedural protocol for inter state arrests such that the arrest was lawful; (ii) Whether directions should be issued for production, preservation of CCTV evidence and an inquiry/status report by the Greater Noida police into the circumstances of the arrest and alleged injuries.

Issue (i): Whether the inter state arrest complied with the protocol prescribed in Sandeep Kumar and applicable statutory safeguards so as to render the arrest lawful.

Analysis: The Court examined the timeline in the FIR and the Delhi Police status report, noting absence of prior intimation to Delhi Police, lack of recorded grounds at the time of arrest, and apparent non observance of the procedures set out in the Sandeep Kumar directions (including requirements for prior authorisation/entries, informing local police, arrest memos, and production before a magistrate). The CJM's order and material on record showed that requisite prior permission from the Supreme Court (insofar as applicable to the petitioner) had not been placed before the remand application. Medical evidence and video material were considered relevant to assess physical assault and custody conditions, and the Court accepted that non compliance with prescribed procedures rendered the arrest prima facie contrary to law.

Conclusion: The Court concluded that the inter state arrest, on the material before it, did not comply with the prescribed protocol and statutory safeguards and was prima facie unlawful in the manner it was effected.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner should be produced and whether further directions should be given for preservation of evidence and inquiry by the Greater Noida police into personnel, vehicle used, medical findings and compliance with inter state arrest protocol.

Analysis: The Court noted that the petitioner had been produced before the Magistrate in Gautam Budh Nagar, that the remand application had been dismissed by the Magistrate, and that the petitioner had been released. Given the concerns about absence of prior intimation, use of private vehicle, absence of uniforms, injuries recorded in the MLC and need to examine CCTV footage, the Court found it necessary to require preservation and production of relevant CCTV, and to direct the Commissioner of Police, Greater Noida to file a status report addressing identity of officers, vehicle details, medical/X ray findings and whether a protocol had been agreed with Delhi Police, together with attendance of a senior Noida Police official.

Conclusion: The Court directed preservation and production of CCTV footage, required a status report from the Commissioner of Police, Greater Noida on the specified aspects, and ordered attendance of a senior Noida Police official in Court on the listed date. The petition was allowed to the extent of these directions and in view of the magistrate's order the petitioner was released.

Final Conclusion: The Court granted the writ relief sought to the extent of declaring the arrest prima facie non compliant with inter state arrest protocol, directed preservation and production of evidence, and ordered an inquiry/status report by the Greater Noida police; the petitioner has been released and the writ petition succeeds on these terms.

Ratio Decidendi: Inter state arrests must comply with the procedural protocol and statutory safeguards (including prior intimation/permission where required, arrest memos, diary entries, production before magistrate within statutory limits and preservation of evidence); failure to follow the prescribed protocol renders such arrest prima facie unlawful and warrants judicial intervention and remedial directions.

---