https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299866 Complete restraint of the applicant by enforcement officers was treated as arrest and detention from the moment his movements were fully curtailed, and the delay in producing him before the Magistrate beyond 24 hours was viewed as a breach of Articles 21 and 22(2) of the Constitution. The later remand to judicial custody did not cure the earlier illegality or prevent the applicant from challenging the unlawful detention at the first available opportunity. On that reasoning, the applicant was found entitled to bail. en-us Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Jan 2022 08:53:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299866 Complete restraint of the applicant by enforcement officers was treated as arrest and detention from the moment his movements were fully curtailed, and the delay in producing him before the Magistrate beyond 24 hours was viewed as a breach of Articles 21 and 22(2) of the Constitution. The later remand to judicial custody did not cure the earlier illegality or prevent the applicant from challenging the unlawful detention at the first available opportunity. On that reasoning, the applicant was found entitled to bail. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299866