https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464215 HC dismissed the petition challenging the arrest. Court found the detainee was informed of the grounds of arrest and produced before a Judicial Magistrate who granted seven days' police custody, so there was no violation of Article 22(1). The request to direct preservation/production of CCTV footage was denied for lack of specific justification in the petition; HC declined to exercise writ jurisdiction to order preservation. Petitioner was permitted to apply to the competent Magistrate or court for preservation, and the concerned DySP was directed to look into the matter. en-us Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 12 Oct 2025 16:25:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464215 HC dismissed the petition challenging the arrest. Court found the detainee was informed of the grounds of arrest and produced before a Judicial Magistrate who granted seven days' police custody, so there was no violation of Article 22(1). The request to direct preservation/production of CCTV footage was denied for lack of specific justification in the petition; HC declined to exercise writ jurisdiction to order preservation. Petitioner was permitted to apply to the competent Magistrate or court for preservation, and the concerned DySP was directed to look into the matter. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464215