Is this unconstitutional act of the police?

@ Sh. Assumi

What police did as per facts before us is un-constitutional
Reason:

These were the rights of the YOUTH in your home town whose check and balance were faulty executed;

·     Persons arrested must be informed of the full particulars of the offence committed
    and the grounds for arrest. (S.50 Cr. P.C. and Art 22 (1) - Constitution of India)

 

·         All persons arrested / detained must be served a custody memo as per Supreme Court directions in ref.: D.K. Basu Vs State of West Bengal

      https://indiankanoon.org/doc/501198/

 

·         Persons arrested cannot be detained for more than 24 hours in Police Custody (Ss.56/57 Cr.P.C. and Art 22 (2) Constitution of India.

 

·         An Accused person is entitled to a copy, free of cost, of the Police Final Report, First Information Report (FIR), statements of all persons whom prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses (S. 207, S. 154, S.. 161 [3]) confessions and statements if any recorded and any other documents, relevant extracts forwarded to the Magistrate.

 

·         The arrested person has a right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice (Art. 22 (1) of the Constitution of India).

 

·         If the arrested person is poor, he can get free Legal Assistance from the Legal Services Authority (Art. 39 A Constitution of India).

 

·         The person arrested, has a right to be examined by a registered medical practitioner (Sec.54) to disprove, the commission of Offence or to prove the ill-treatment of the police or any other suitable reason. (S. 54 Cr. P.C).

 

·         Arrest should not be made on mere suspicion (S. 145 Cr. P.C).

 

·       The arrested person is entitled for compensation for groundless arrest / illegal detention.

 

·         A Magistrate may order for the remand of the arrested person to police custody u/s 167 (3) of the Cr.P.C.  The Magistrate should be fully satisfied that there is good ground to remand the accused to police custody.

 

·         When remand to police custody is granted? [subject to Supreme Court orders in  D.K. Basu (supra)].

 

I.   the accused in police custody can be kept in police lock - up.

 

II.  can be taken to any place for purposes of investigation within this period.

 

III.  can be kept at any place for purposes of investigation within this period.

 

·         There should always be an entry in the Daily Diary (i.e. General Diary) when accused is taken out of police lock-up or readmitted;

 

·         If the accused falls ill in police lock-up, he must be given medical aid or treatment admitted for in a hospital.

 

·         if an accused dies in police custody, officer - in - charge shall immediately inform the nearest Executive Magistrate empowered to hold inquests, for investigation u/s 176 Cr.P.C. and intimated to the National Human Rights Commission within 24 hours.

 

·         detention of accused for longer than 24 hours when not produced for remand and beyond period of remand without orders of Magistrate is illegal and Police Officer is liable u/s 342 IPC and u/s 29 of the Police Act.

 

·         Accused may engage a counsel during proceedings of remand and accused may raise an objection that the police is not entitled to custody.

 

 

Hope I have not given you too much introspection on faulty check and balances of criminal Law that miserably failed in instance brief?

Now may I ask a question with your permission!

Which Police Rules your State Follows?

Thanks Tajobsindia. I would appreciate if other members also share their views on such police acts.

One of the ways to deal with this illegal arrest by police is to build evidence of illegal arrest by police. The moment 24 hours are about to lapse, send registered letters with A/D to SHO of police station, copies to SP and IG informing that Mr. X has been arrested at such time and place, 24 hours are almost about to lapse within such time, please either release him before lapse of 24 hours or produce in court within 24 hours. In addition emails to same people can also be sent. Also inform the SHO verbally that registered letters and emails have been dispatched.

Thanks for the responds.

The above are true but you have to also see that in the present case a executive magistrate is exercising a judicial power which is the foremost unconstitutional and illegal. When the CJM was absent the general procedure is high court by an administrative order authorising any magistrate to exercise the power of CJM. An executive magistrate exercising judicial power is totally unconstitutional. So far arrest is concerned the person arrest should disclose the facts of his arrest, the time of arrest, etc to the magistrate before whom he is first produced at the very first initial stage. He should request the magistrate to record his grievances before signing on the ordersheet of the court. If his grievances is not recorded a person can refuse to sign on the record of the court. From your facts it appears it is a bailable case and in this case bail would have been given by the police itself.