5.Submission by the Additional Public Prosecutor

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the accused were initially apprehended on suspicion at 10:58 hours on 23.11.2024. However, they were formally arrested at 16:10 hours on 23.11.2024 and were produced before the Magistrate within the stipulated 24 hours.

He further submitted that the accused were apprehended with contraband related to offences under the NDPS Act and that they belonged to another State. Therefore, their arrest was effected only after providing the necessary information to the relatives of the accused persons. Accordingly, he requested the Court to consider these circumstances.

6.Consideration by the Court

The Court stated that it had perused the materials available on record.

7.Legal Position under the Cr.P.C

Section 57 and 167(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) clearly provide that a person who is arrested cannot be detained by the police for more than 24 hours without being produced before a Magistrate. These provisions also prescribe the procedure to be followed when an investigation cannot be completed within the initial 24 hours of arrest.

In the present case, there was no material placed by the prosecution showing that any legal steps were taken to seek an extension of time to produce the accused before the Magistrate after the expiry of 24 hours.

Further, detaining a person in custody beyond 24 hours without lawful authority would amount to a violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India.

8.Reference to Judicial Precedents

The Hon’ble Apex Court in Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) and this Court in W.P. No.21912 of 2024 have clearly held that the 24-hour period under Section 57 of Cr.P.C begins from the time of apprehension.

Considering this legal position, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P. No.12912 of 2024 observed as follows:

Paragraph 12

The period of apprehension must also be taken into account while calculating the 24-hour period under Section 57 of Cr.P.C. In other words, the 24 hours should not be calculated from the time of the official arrest shown in the arrest memo, but from the moment the accused was initially apprehended or taken into custody.

The Court further observed that certain accused were produced before the Judicial Magistrate only after completion of 24 hours from the time of apprehension, which amounted to a clear violation of Section 57 of Cr.P.C.

Paragraph 25

The Court also held that the provisions of the TSPDEF Act do not override the mandatory provisions of the Cr.P.C. The fundamental right of a person who is apprehended or arrested to be produced before the nearest Judicial Magistrate remains intact. Ignoring this requirement would defeat the purpose of Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India and Sections 167(1) and 167(2) of Cr.P.C.

9.Findings of the Court

In the present case, the records clearly show that:

Apprehension Time: 10:58 AM on 23.11.2024

Remand Time: 1:00 PM on 24.11.2024

Therefore, the petitioner was produced before the Magistrate beyond the legally permitted 24-hour period.

Based on the settled legal position, the Court held that the remand order is contrary to law. Consequently, the impugned remand order against the petitioner stands vitiated.

Accordingly, the remand order dated 24.11.2024 in respect of the petitioner (Accused No.2) is set aside. The respondents are directed to release the petitioner from custody, subject to the petitioner furnishing bail and bonds as prescribed by the Court below, to its satisfaction.

10.Final Order

In view of the above findings, the criminal petition is allowed.

All miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
Date: 09.04.2025