4 days ago
‘Magistrates must not authorise detention mechanically': Telangana HC sets aside man's judicial remand over 24-hour norm
The Telangana High Court on Tuesday quashed the judicial remand of a man accused in a cheating case, holding that he was produced before the magistrate beyond the mandatory 24-hour period from the time of detention as prescribed under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha (BNSS).
Justice N Tukaramji pronounced the order while allowing a criminal revision after the petitioner's counsel, Mohammed Azhar, argued that the remand order was invalid on several grounds.
Following an FIR at Malakpet police station, the petitioner was arrested and produced before the magistrate after the mandatory 24-hour period from the time of detention. The counsel for the petitioner substantiated this claim by citing the remand case diary, which recorded the apprehension at approximately 10.15 pm on July 7 this year and production before the court at about 11.35 pm on July 8. This delay of approximately 1 hour and 20 minutes, beyond the 24-hour period under Section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code, rendered the remand illegal.
Additional Public Prosecutor Jithender Rao Veeramalla conceded that the petitioner was produced beyond the 24-hour period from the time of arrest.
Furthermore, the petitioner's counsel contended that the alleged offences, which fall under sections 318(4) and 204 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), are punishable with less than seven years of imprisonment.
Citing the Supreme Court judgment in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Another and Section 41A of the CrPC/35(3) of the BNSS, the counsel argued that the petitioner should have been served with a notice for appearance instead of being arrested.
'It has been expressly directed that magistrates must not authorise detention mechanically but must record detailed and reasoned orders reflecting judicial satisfaction. Failure to comply with these directives renders the remand unlawful and invites judicial or departmental scrutiny,' the order read.
The court found that the impugned remand order in this case merely noted the fact of production and other details without addressing the legality of the arrest, the delay in production, or the statutory mandates. 'While these grounds may provide a basis for arrest in theory, they must be assessed in light of the procedural safeguards mandated by law and judicial precedent. The record fails to show that the magistrate made such an assessment,' the order read.
As a result of these findings, the court set aside the remand order and directed the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, to take immediate steps to secure the release of the petitioner.
Within one week of his release, the petitioner is required to execute a personal bond for Rs 10,000 and furnish two sureties of the same amount. The petitioner must also remain available and cooperate with the ongoing judicial proceedings, the court said.
