TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1572
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eas corpus. The facts that have transpired, are that the Petitioner was first detained on 16th February, 2025, around 05:13 PM by the SHO Beta-II Police Station at Gautam Budh Nagar, (Noida) UP and was released at 9:30 PM on the same day. 3. Again, on 18th February, 2025, he was intercepted near Shivaji Stadium, Connaught Place, New Delhi by the U.P. police without any prior information being given to the Delhi Police and has been taken to an unknown location. His whereabouts were thereafter not known. Hence, the present petition was filed, seeking his production. 4. When the matter was listed and taken up in the supplementary list yesterday i.e. 19th February, 2025, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the suspicion is that the UP Police has picked up the Petitioner and have not produced him before any Court. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that the protocol in cases where inter-state police arrest was made, was also not followed in the present case, in terms of the judgment by ld. Division Bench of this Court in Sandeep Kumar v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Others, 2019:DHC:6920-DB. It is prayed that the Petitioner ought to be traced and produ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owever, there are certain movements of cars, which have been captured at some locations on CCTV. 8. Mr. Mittal, ld. Counsel had entered appearance for the State of U.P. and submitted that as per instructions received, an FIR 0074/2025 dated 18th February, 2025 at PS Beta II, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, UP has been registered in view of various allegations raised against the Petitioner by the Co-Promoters 'DS Group' about certain incidents alleged to have occurred at the Grand Venice Mall, Greater Noida, UP. A copy of the FIR was also handed over to the Court. It is submitted by Mr. Mittal that the Petitioner has been produced before ACJM-II, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida and the arguments on remand have been heard. The Petitioner has also prayed for bail therein. The order was reserved. 9. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, ld. Counsel appearing for the Complainant had submitted that there are serious allegations against the Petitioner and he ought to be given an opportunity to make submissions. 10. After hearing ld. Counsels for the parties, prima facie, upon seeing the date and time of the information received as recorded in the FIR, and the status report filed by the Delhi Police, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion. It should contain names of the police officials and private individuals accompanying him; vehicle number; purpose of visit; specific place(s) to be visited; time and date of departure. 4. If the possible arrestee is a female, a lady police officer be made part of the team. The Police Officers should take their identity cards with them. All police officers in the team should be in uniform; bear accurate, visible and clear identification and name tags with their designations. 5. Before visiting the other State, the Police Officer must endeavour to establish contact with the local Police Station in whose jurisdiction he is to conduct the investigation. He must carry with him the translated copies of the Complaint/FIR and other documents in the language of the State which he intends to visit. 6. After reaching the destination, first of all, he should inform the concerned police station of the purpose of his visit to seek assistance and cooperation. The concerned SHO should provide/render all legal assistance to him. Entry to this effect must be made at the said police station. 7. After reaching the spot of investigation, search, if any should be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rson is not denied the right to consult and to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice. The Magistrate should ask the person arrested brought before him whether in fact he has been informed of the grounds of arrest and whether he requires to consult and be defended by any legal practitioner of his choice. (DK Basu, Supra) After the pronouncement of this judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, new Sections 41A to 41D have been added to prevent unnecessary arrest and misuse of powers. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter. 13. In terms of S. 41C, control rooms be established in every district. Names and addresses of the persons arrested and designation of the Police Officers who made the arrest be displayed. Control Room at State level must collect details of the persons so arrested. 14. The police officer must record all the proceedings conducted by him at the spot and prepare an 'arrest memo' indicating time, date of arrest and name of the relation/friend to whom intimation of arrest has been given. It must reveal the reasons for arrest. 15. Since the arrestee is to be taken out of his State to a place away where he may ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e maintained and signed. The IO must indicate whether the vehicle was official or a private one; name of its driver and how and by whom it was arranged. Only official vehicle should be used for transportation to the extent possible. 22. At the time of recovery of the prosecutrix, the police officer, if he is satisfied that she is adult, should ascertain from her at the spot, whether she was present there with her free will. If the victim/prosecutrix is not willing to accompany the police officer or her relatives, the police officer must not exert force on the prosecutrix to take her away against her wishes. However, if the prosecutrix/victim of her own accord expresses willingness to accompany the police officer/relatives, her consent in writing should be obtained at the spot. 23. In case where the police officer finds the victim/prosecutrix to be a 'minor', soon after recovery, she should be produced before the local Child Welfare Committee for further decision regarding her custody. She must not be made to stay in the Police Station during night hours. 24. Statement of the prosecutrix u/s 164 Cr.P.C. must be recorded at the earliest. 25....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....., on 20th February, 2025 at 2:30 PM. 19. The Delhi Police is directed to preserve any CCTV footage that may be available at various locations which show picking up of the Petitioner or the cars in which the Petitioner was intercepted and taken by the UP Police. The same may be preserved and be produced in a pen-drive tomorrow with the time stamp. 20. List tomorrow i.e., on 20th February, 2025 at 2:30 PM." 15. The Court had thus directed that the Petitioner, if not released on bail by the ld. Magistrate in Noida, he shall be produced before this Court. Delhi Police was also directed to produce the CCTV footage. 16. Today, Mr. Mittal, ld. Counsel appearing for the UP Police has placed on record the order passed by the concerned CJM yesterday evening i.e., 19th February, 2025 wherein the Court has observed as under:- "जिससे यह स्पष्ट है कि प्रार्थी / पिटिशनर के सम्बन्ध में माê....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....346;त्र के साथ प्रस्तुत नहीं किया गया है। माननीय सर्वोच्च न्यायालय द्वारा रिट पिटिशन (एस.) 197/2021 सतेन्द्र सिंह भसीन बनाम उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य एवं अन्य में पारित आदेश दिनाकित-06.07.2021 को द्रष्टिगत रखते हुए अभियुक्त सतेन....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in connection with the Case (FIR) No. 74/2025, U/s 303(2), 331, 334, 36(2), 331(6), 317(2), 109, 305, 326 Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, PS Beta-2, Gautam Budha Nagar against accused Satendra Singh Bhasin alias Montu S/o Late Jaswant Singh Bhasin R/o W.P.(CRL) 598/2025 Page 14 of 15 D-24, Rajouri Garden, PS Rajouri Garden, Delhi is liable to be dismissed, hence stands dismissed." 17. The Court is also informed that in view of the above order, the police remand has not been extended qua the Petitioner and he has already been released. 18. In terms of the above prescribed protocol, no information appears to have been given to the Delhi Police prior to the arrest of the Petitioner, who is a resident of Delhi. The matter requires a deeper look as none of the other prescribed procedures appears to have been followed. No grounds of arrest also appear to have been communicated at the time of arrest. If the procedures prescribed are not followed, the arrest itself would be contrary to law. 19. Moreover, the dispute between promoters is also presently pending before the NCLT/NCLAT. Certain orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, granting bail in favour of the Petitioner, in previous FIRs ....