Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Moin Akhtar Qureshi Versus Union of India & Ors.

2017 (12) TMI 289 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Prevention of Money Laundering - judicial custody - writ of habeas corpus - Held that:- The reason for the petitioner not pressing his bail application before the learned Special Judge was that on 13.09.2017, in the present proceedings the petitioner had made a statement through counsel that he shall not press his application for regular bail before the Competent Court till the next date of hearing, which got extended from 09.10.2017 to 16.10.2017; and from 16.10.2017 to 17.10.2017 and; from 17. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was produced from custody. He was directed to be produced from custody on the next date, which was fixed as 07.11.2017. - Thus, the petitioner continues to be in judicial custody and there appears to be no illegality whatsoever in his continuing judicial custody. The petitioner has statutory remedy of seeking regular bail from the Competent Court under Section 45 of the PMLA. Thus, there was no question of this Court being called to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus for release of the petitione .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ticle 22(1) of the Constitution of India, as the petitioner stood informed of the grounds of his arrest when he was permitted to read the same. He was also informed of the same vide the remand application under Section 167 Cr PC read with Section 65 of the PMLA moved on 26.08.2017. We also agree with the submission of Mr. Mahajan that a writ of habeas corpus does not lie in the facts of the present case, since the petitioner was placed initially in ED custody remand, and thereafter in judicial c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eas corpus directing the respondent Enforcement Directorate (ED) to produce him before the Court and to set aside his illegal arrest vide the arrest memo dated 25.08.2017. He also seeks the quashing of the application dated 16.08.2017 moved by the respondent ED to seek his ED custody remand, and the order dated 26.08.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, Patiala House Courts, Delhi on the said remand application on 26.08.2017. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the ED searched his pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that he appeared in response to the summons issued in the PMLA case between November 2016 and 16.12.2016. 3. On 16.02.2017, the CBI registered FIR RC No.224/2017 under Section 8, 9, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) and Section 120B IPC against the petitioner, unknown persons and public servants for alleged offences committed during the period 2011-2013. 4. On 15.03.2017, the ED registered another ECIR being No. ECIR/02/DLZO/2017/AD under the PMLA on the basis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rest, or even the remand application. Only on the directions of the learned Special Judge issued during the proceedings, he was provided with a copy of the remand application, but not the grounds of arrest, or copy of the ECIR. The learned Special Judge, CBI remanded the petitioner to the custody of the respondent ED till 31.08.2017. 6. Consequently, the petitioner preferred the present writ petition dated 29.08.2017. It was listed before the Court on 30.08.2017 when the respondents appeared thr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

made a statement that, in the meantime, the application for regular bail instituted on behalf of the petitioner before the competent court shall not be pressed. The matter was adjourned from time to time thereafter for one or the other reason, and it was directed to be listed on 23.10.2017. Since the roster had changed by then and the matter was part heard, the same was directed to be listed before the same bench on 27.10.2017. On 23.10.2017, counsel for the petitioner also withdrew the stateme .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

submission of Mr. Handoo, we reproduce herein below the aforesaid provisions. Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India reads: (1) No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice . (emphasis supplied) Section 19 of the PMLA reads: 19. Power to arrest.- (1) If the Director, Deputy Director, Assistant Director, or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

such person under sub-section (1), forward a copy of the order, along with the material in his possession, referred to in that sub-section, to the Adjudicating Authority, in a sealed envelope, in the manner, as may be prescribed and such Adjudicating Authority shall keep such order and material for such period, as may be prescribed. (3) Every person arrested under sub-section (1) shall within twenty-four hours, be taken to a Judicial Magistrate or a Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le 22(1) obliges the arresting officer to inform the person arrested and detained in custody, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest. The other two facets of Article 22(1) are that the person who is arrested shall not be denied the right to consult a legal practitioner of his choice, and to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice. Mr. Handoo submits that the information of the grounds of arrest to the person detained in custody is an essential compliance guaranteed by the sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ch he has been arrested. If the information furnished to the arrested person of the grounds of arrest does not enable such person to effectively undertake his remedies by way of consulting a legal practitioner of his choice, and to liberate himself from custody in the proceedings, the manner of furnishing the information would be of no avail. He further submits that the compliance of the obligation to inform the person arrested of the ground for arrest is not an empty formality, since the said o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in the facts of the present case, the petitioner was served with an arrest memo which disclosed the section of law under which, presumably, the petitioner was arrested as 3 r/w 4 Prevention of Money Laundering Act of 2002 . By itself, the said information was wholly inadequate to enable the petitioner to brief his legal practitioner, or to enable the petitioner to effectively protect his liberty. He further submits that the petitioner was purportedly shown the grounds of arrest and his endorsem .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

does not tantamount to effective and actionable information, on the basis of which the petitioner could have consulted a legal practitioner or to effectively defend his liberty through his legal practitioner. 13. Mr. Handoo has referred to the petitioners pleadings contained in para 41 and 42 of the petition, wherein the petitioner has made a categorical averment that he was arrested without communicating to him, or giving him, a copy of the grounds of arrest and he was asked to append his init .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

opposed the application vehemently. He has argued that the accused has not been informed of the grounds of his arrest. Further, he has argued that ED has no power to seek custody of the accused. Further, he has also argued that the allegations of the ED are same as were raised by the IT department against the accused and he has been investigated by the IT department since then. He also argued that no scheduled offence is attracted in this case and the application itself is contradictory. 12. To .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in the present proceedings. In para 6 of the said counter-affidavit, under the heading Preliminary Submissions , the respondents have, inter alia, stated that in terms of the provisions of the PMLA, the petitioner was immediately informed about the grounds of such arrest, and a copy of the arrest order alongwith material was forwarded to the adjudicating authority in terms of section 19(2) of the Act. 16. Mr. Handoo has drawn the attention of the Court to Prevention of Money Laundering (the for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or or Deputy Director or Assistant Director or any authorised officer, as the case may be, on the basis of which he has recorded reasons under sub-section (1) of section 19 of the Act; (h) order means the order of arrest of a person and includes the grounds for such arrest under sub-section (1) of section 19 of the Act; (emphasis supplied) 17. Mr. Handoo submits that for exercise of power of arrest under Section 19 of the PMLA, it is essential that the Competent Authority should, firstly, have m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

under section 19(1) of the Act. Therefore, it is imperative that the grounds of arrest, which form part of the order of arrest, are served on the person arrested under Section 19(1) of the PMLA along with the order of arrest. Without the ground of arrest, the order of arrest is incomplete. Without the grounds of arrest, the arrestee would not know what is that material, on the basis of which the Competent Authority has formed his belief that the arrestee is guilty of the offence under the Act. H .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hi s/o Lt Sh. Abdul Majeed Qureshi R/o C-134 GF Defence Colony, New Delhi is in possession of more evidences in this case and he is withholding/ not divulging the same, thus will jeopardize the investigation under PMLA, 2002. Hence, Moin Akhtar Qureshi was arrested on 25.08.2017 at 8.00 PM as per the procedure laid down under the PMLA and the grounds of arrest have been informed to him. The intimation of arrest has been telephonically given to his wife Ms. Nasreen Akhtar Qureshi on her mobile ph .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rest. Only upon the directions of the learned Special Judge, CBI, the application to seek the petitioners remand was served upon the petitioners counsel. 21. Mr. Handoo further submits that the learned Special Judge, CBI while allowing the remand application preferred by the ED on 26.08.2017, passed the order mechanically and without application of mind, granting ED custody remand for a period of five days i.e. upto 31.08.2017. Mr. Handoo submits that the learned Special Judge, CBI further exten .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

urt in State of Bombay v. Atma Ram, AIR 1951 SC 157 (C), wherein the Supreme Court had held that the test is, whether the communication is sufficient to enable the detained person to make a representation at the earliest opportunity. The Division Bench also referred to Magan Lal Jivabhai, in re:, AIR 1951 Bom 33 (D), wherein it was held that the only possible and reasonable construction that can be put upon the language of Article 22(6), is that the detaining authority while furnishing grounds o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

decisions of Courts under Cl. (5) of Article 22 will be of much assistance in interpreting Cl. (1) of Article 22. 31. The object underlying the provision that the ground for arrest should be communicated to the person arrested appears to be this. On learning about the ground for arrest, the man will be in a position to make an application to the appropriate Court for bail, or move the High Court for a writ of habeas corpus. Further, the information will enable the arrested person to prepare his .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

described in annexure C took place at Kanpur. The petitioner was arrested in Kanpur City. The jail is located at Kanpur. The necessary information could easily be supplied to the petitioner within a week of his arrest. 32. However, all that the petitioner was told that, he had been arrested under Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932. This information could not give the petitioner any idea about the offence, which he is supposed to have committed. We have seen that S. 7 of the Act pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Court for the trial of a case. In the present case the petitioner should have been told that the charge against him is that, on the morning of 18-5-1955 near J.K. Jute Mill, Kanpur he threatened Janardan Pande in order to dissuade him from going to work. (emphasis supplied) 23. In para 42 and 43, the Division Bench observed: 42. It is the fundamental right of every person that on being arrested he must be informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest ; he cannot be detained in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd amounting, to an offence punishable under Section 7. 43. The rule in Article 22(1) that a person on being arrested must be informed of the grounds for the arrest is similar to, though not exactly identical with, the rules prevailing in England and in United States of America. The rule prevailing in England is that in normal circumstances an arrest without warrant either by a policeman or by a private person can be justified only if it is an arrest on a charge made known to the person arrested .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he submissions of Madhu Limaye in para 11 and 12 by holding as follows: 11. It remains to be seen whether any proper cause has been shown in the return for declining the prayer of Madhu Limaye and other arrested persons for releasing them on the ground that there was non-compliance with the provisions of Article 22(1) of the Constitution. In Ram Narayan Singh case it was laid down that the court must have regard to the legality or otherwise of the detention at the time of the return. In the pres .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ested; vide Proposition 3 in Christie v. Leachinsky [(1947) 1 All ELR 567] . Nor has it been suggested that the show-cause notices which were issued on November 11, 1968, satisfied the constitutional requirement. Madhu Limaye and others are, therefore, entitled to be released on this ground alone. 12. Once it is shown that the arrests made by the police officers were illegal, it was necessary for the State to establish that at the stage of remand the Magistrate directed detention in jail custody .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on or confinement in jail without compliance with the constitutional and legal provisions. If their detention in custody could not continue after their arrest because of the violation of Article 22(1) of the Constitution they were entitled to be released forthwith. The orders of remand are not such as would cure the constitutional infirmities. This disposes of the third contention of Madhu Limaye. (emphasis supplied) 26. Mr. Handoo has also drawn our attention to Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistra .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he was detained without being informed of the grounds for his arrest as required by clause (1) of Article 22 of the Constitution. B. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Darjeeling had no jurisdiction to try the two Phansidewa, P.S. Cases against the petitioner and he could not, therefore, authorise the detention of the petitioner under Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for a term exceeding fifteen days in the whole. It was only the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Siliguri who had jurisdiction .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Supreme Court while dealing with the aforesaid grounds of challenge observed as follows: Re: Grounds A and B. 4. These two grounds relate exclusively to the legality of the initial detention of the petitioner in the District Jail, Darjeeling. We think it unnecessary to decide them. It is now well settled that the earliest date with reference to which the legality of detention challenged in a habeas corpus proceeding may be examined is the date on which the application for habeas corpus is made .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ely, Naranjan Singh v. State of Punjab [AIR 1952 SC 106 : 1952 SCR 395 : 1952 Cri LJ 656] and Ram Narayan Singh v. State of Delhi [1953 SCR 652 : AIR 1953 SC 277 : 1953 Cri LJ 1113] a slightly different view was expressed and that view was reiterated by this Court in B.R. Rao v. State of Orissa [(1972) 3 SCC 256, 259 : 1972 SCC (Cri) 481] where it was said (at p. 259, para 7): in habeas corpus proceedings the Court is to have regard to the legality or otherwise of the detention at the time of th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

onsonance with the law and practice in England and may be taken as having received the largest measure of approval in India, though the third view also cannot be discarded as incorrect, because an inquiry whether the detention is legal or not at the date of hearing of the application for habeas corpus would be quite relevant, for the simple reason that if on that date the detention is legal, the Court cannot order release of the person detained by issuing a writ of habeas corpus. But, for the pu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n the present case was filed on January 6, 1973 and on that date the petitioner was in detention in the Central Jail, Vizakhapatnam. The initial detention of the petitioner in the District Jail, Darjeeling had come to an end long before the date of the filing of the writ petition. It is, therefore, unnecessary to examine the legality or otherwise of the detention of the petitioner in the District Jail, Darjeeling. The only question that calls for consideration is whether the detention of the pet .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n merits. We, therefore, consider it unnecessary to embark on a discussion of grounds A and B and decline to decide them. (emphasis supplied) 28. Mr. Handoo has also placed reliance on the decision of the Orissa High Court in N. Ratnakumari v. State of Odisha, 2014 Cri LJ 4433 - a decision rendered by a Division Bench. The Division Bench was dealing with a writ of habeas corpus, wherein the arrest and detention was challenged on the ground of the same being illegal and unlawful. He has particula .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ate of application and the date of hearing. In the case of Col. Dr. B. Ramachandra Rao Vrs. State of Orissa reported in AIR 1971 SC 2197, it is held that in habeas corpus, the Court is to have regard to the legality or otherwise of the detention at the time of return and not with reference to the institution of the proceeding. In the case of Talib Hussain Vrs. State of Jammu Kashmir reported in AIR 1971 SC 62, it is held that in habeas corpus proceeding, the Court has to consider the legality of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f hearing of the application for habeas corpus could be quite relevant, for simple reason that if on that day the detention is legal, the Court cannot order release of the person detained by issuing a writ of habeas corpus. The learned Advocate General places reliance in case of Manubhai Ratilal Patel Vrs. State of Gujarat reported in (2013) 1 Supreme Court Cases 314 wherein it is held (para 31) that it is the well- accepted principle that a writ of habeas corpus is not to be entertained when a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

unity to the arrested person to remove any mistake, misapprehension or misunderstanding in the minds of the arresting authority and, also, to known exactly what the accusation against him is so that he can exercise to know exactly what the accusation against him is so that he can exercise the second right, namely, of consulting a legal practitioner of his choice and to be defended by him. Clause (2) of Article 22 provides the next and most material safeguard that the arrested person must be prod .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

custody could not continue after their arrest because of the violation of Art.22 (1) of constitution, they were entitled to be released forthwith. The orders of remand are not such as would cure the constitutional infirmities. It is further held that if the detention in custody could not continue after the arrest because of violation of Article 22 (1) of the Constitution, the arrested person detained in jail custody is entitled to be released forthwith. The orders of remand which are routine an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

passed against the appellant. He was alleged to be guilty of flouting the said order. The Supreme Court held that the externment order was an encroachment on the petitioners fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, since the Commissioner of Police had passed the same without due hearing. Resultantly, the same had been quashed by the Court as unconstitutional and void. Consequently, the appellant was held never to have been guilty of flouting an order, which never legally .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a Ram (supra) to submit that vague grounds of arrest would render the detention of the detenue illegal. 31. Mr. Handoo has also drawn the attention of the Court to Section 78 of the Code. Section 78(1) provides that when a warrant is to be executed outside the local jurisdiction of the Court issuing it, such Court may, instead of directing the warrant to a police officer within its jurisdiction, forward it by post or otherwise to any Executive Magistrate or District Superintendent of Police or C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

may be sufficient to enable the Court acting under section 81 to decide whether bail should or should not be granted to the person. (emphasis supplied) Mr. Handoo submits that the necessity of forwarding, with the warrant, the substance of the information against the person to be arrested together with documents, if any, is to sufficiently enable the concerned court to decide whether bail should, or should not, be granted to the person. Similarly, while arresting a person under Section 19 of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

50 of the Code obliges, every police officer or other person arresting any person without warrant ........ to forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest. 32. He submits that the ED has acted as a judge in its own cause. The ED had sent a communication to the CBI on 31.08.2016 informing the CBI that during the course of investigation under FEMA, inter alia, against the petitioner, he was found to have indulged as a middl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ons issued to him practically on all the dates. 34. On the other hand, Mr. Amit Mahajan, learned counsel representing the ED submits that Article 22(1) obliges the authority concerned - who is arresting a person and detaining him in custody, to inform such arrested person, as soon as may be, of the grounds of his arrest. He submits that Article 22 also deals with preventive detention of a person, other than by way of arrest, in sub-Articles (4) to (7) thereof. Article 22(5) reads as follows: (5) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ch person the grounds on which the order ... ... ... (emphasis supplied) of detention has been made. The purpose of communication of the grounds of detention is to afford to the detenue the earliest opportunity of making a representation against the order. 36. Mr. Mahajan submits that a detenue who is preventively detained, only has a right of making a representation and, consequently, the obligation cast on the State is to communicate the grounds of detention to him, as soon as it may be possib .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n to a person preventively detained. 37. In support of his above submission, Mr. Mahajan, firstly, places reliance on Chhagan Chandrakant Bhujbal v. Union of India, 2016 SCC Online Bom 9938 - a decision rendered by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in a writ petition preferred to seek a writ of habeas corpus for release of the petitioner. In the said case, two Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) were registered by the ED. The petitioner was summoned in respect of those ECIRs and h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xtended from time to time. At the time of filing of the writ petition, he was still in judicial custody. Subsequently, a criminal complaint was preferred against the petitioner and other accused persons before the Special Court alleging commission of offence under Section 3 read with Section 4 of the PMLA. The Special Court took cognisance of the offence under the PMLA and summoned the accused. 38. The petitioner Chhagan Chandrakant Bhujbal had advanced the submission before the Division Bench t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e word 'order' as given in Sub-Clause (h) of Rule 2, provides that the grounds for such arrest are to be provided in writing to the person arrested. It indicates that oral communication of the grounds of arrest is not only a substantial but proper compliance of the provision. 190. The provision of Section 19(1) also does not state that the grounds of arrest are to be informed to the person arrested, immediately. The use of the word in the said provision as soon as may be , makes it clear .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

reby indicating that there is no statutory requirement of grounds of arrest to be communicated in writing and that too at the time of arrest or immediately after the arrest. The use of the words 'as soon as may be' implies that such grounds of arrest should be communicated at the earliest . (Emphasis supplied) 39. Mr. Mahajan also places reliance on the decision of the Bombay High Court in Sunil Chainani and Others Vs. Inspector of Police, C.B. Control, Bombay and Another, (1987) SCC OnL .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ir arrest were not at all communicated to them. On the other hand, the respondent claimed that the accused were orally communicated the grounds of their arrest. The learned Magistrate observed that Section 50 of the Code was mandatory, and as there was no compliance therewith, the accused were entitled to grant of bail. However, on a subsequent application made by the prosecution to seek stay of the order granting bail, the learned Magistrate passed an order staying the execution of the order of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nner: 12. Now as far as the contention of Shri Merchant regarding the requirement of provisions of Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being interpreted in the light of provisions of Article 22(5) is concerned, I think the submission cannot be accepted. There is basic and fundamental difference between the person detained under the provisions of law providing for preventive detention and detention of person arrested on accusation of commission of an offence. In the case of preventive de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rate within 24 hours. He has the right to consult and to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice. The purpose of communication of the grounds of arrest is to enable him to apply for release on bail when he is produced before the Magistrate. Therefore the principles laid down and decisions in cases of preventive detention and the provisions of Article 22(5) cannot be pressed into service for appreciating the ambit and scope of provisions of Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he offence for which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest. Now the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure contemplate that the accused person arrested on the accusation of non-bailable offences has to be produced before the nearest Magistrate within a period of 24 hours and his further detention in custody, whether police or judicial, beyond 24 hours has to be under the authorisation of the learned Magistrate which authorisation cannot be for more than 14 days at a time. Secondl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ink that the communication referred to in Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be in every case in writing. What is important is communication or knowledge or information regarding the particulars of the offence for which the arrest is made or other grounds for such arrest. Provisions in Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provide that the police officer shall forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested . An act can be said to be do .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ation the plea of the accused on the next day before the learned Magistrate that they were not communicated the full particulars of the offence for which they were arrested or the other grounds for their arrest, appears to me palpably unreasonable. Secondly, the words used in Article 22(1) are that no person arrested shall be detained in custody without informing as soon as may be of the grounds of such arrest. Thus if the person is not informed as soon as may be, his further detention may becom .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

unreasonable to hold, as unfortunately the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has held, that the provisions of Section 50 are not complied with and therefore the accused are entitled for bail. (emphasis supplied) 41. Mr. Mahajan points out that - like in the case of Sunil Chainani (supra), in the facts of the present case as well, the remand application contained ample particulars of the case made out against the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner was not only informed of the ground .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, but also that his subsequent remand by the learned Special Judge was also illegal, and that the illegality existed on the date of return in the present petition. In fact, the detention should be illegal on the date of hearing of the writ petition. 43. For this proposition, Mr. Mahajan places reliance on a Full Bench decision of this Court in Rakesh Kumar Vs. State, 53 (1994) DLT 609 (FB). The Full Bench considered a reference made to it on a difference of opinion arising between two learned Ju .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e to be held that the Metropolitan Magistrate had no power to remand the petitioner in judicial custody for a period more than 15 days in all, whether the illegal detention of the petitioner under the remand orders made by the Metropolitan Magistrate from time to time entitles the petitioner to be released forthwith even though during the pendency of this writ petition, after the filing of the return, the petitioner is being remanded to judicial custody validly during the trial of the case by th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

all and, consequently, the detention of the petitioner was illegal, and he was entitled to be released from custody forthwith. The petitioner was apprehended allegedly while carrying opium, which was recovered from his possession. He was arrested and a case registered against him under Sections 18, 61 & 81 of the NDPS Act. Thereafter, he was produced before the learned MM on the following day, who remanded him to judicial custody for 14 days initially, and thereafter, extended the remand of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

etention of such person may have become valid. The Full Bench, however, did not agree with the said view. The Full Bench also, after a detailed analysis of the case law, concluded that, if upto the date of hearing of the writ petition for a writ of Habeas Corpus, it is shown that the detention of the person concerned is valid, the mere fact that it was invalid earlier would not entitle such a petitioner to have any redress in the writ petition. The Full Bench, inter alia, observed as follows: 35 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

th the permission of the Court even upto the date of the hearing of the habeas corpus petition. If a return can be allowed to be amended and filed, then it is not understandable as to how it can be said that in England, the legal position is that detention of a person is to be justified only upto the date of the filing of the return. 36. In a book The Law of Habeas Corpus by R.J. Sharpe, 1976 Edition from pages 174 to 181, the legal position has been summarised by the learned author and he has o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vitiates the present cause of detention, it will not matter what has happened to the prisoner so long as his detention is now justified…….A prisoner may apply for a writ from the very moment of his arrest and in that sense, he may challenge the legality of his arrest. However, where there have been valid proceedings subsequent to the arrest, which are offered in justification of the detention, the prisoner will not usually be able to get redress. The reason for this is twofold. Fi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ays prepared to allow for a substituted warrant which corrects a defect in the first committal. It will be permissible for there to be a substituted warrant even after the writ is issued and served. Indeed, it has been held that it is possible to amend the return to the writ or to supply a new and better cause for the detention as the court commences the hearing. It would seem that so long as the material proffered tends to show present justification, it will be accepted by the court at any stag .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

releasing such a person from custody. 38. It is no doubt true that the Courts under the Constitution are jealously inclined to protect the liberty of a person keeping in view the mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the remedy of taking resort to habeas corpus is the most efficacious remedy available to any aggrieved person. A writ in the nature of habeas corpus is issued requiring the persons or the authorities detaining any person to show cause as to on what basis such a pers .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er in that case was arrested on July 5, 1950 under an order issued by District Magistrate, Amritsar under Section 3 of the Preventive Detention Act 1950. The grounds of detention were served on him on July 10, 1950. The Act was amended in 1951 and fresh order dated May 17, 1951 was issued. The only question which arose for decision was that even if the detention of the petitioner was bad on the date of the institution of the proceedings against him, whether he could be released on that basis, ev .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to be released even though his detention was invalid till before the date of hearing of the writ petition. It is the settled principle of legal interpretation that the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court must be examined in the context in which it has been laid down. The ratio of law cannot be stretched to a particular situation which was never considered by the Supreme Court and which never came up for consideration before the Supreme Court. 41. There is no dispute about the proposition of la .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d was illegal but the second order of detention was valid, so the Supreme Court held that as the second order of detention has become valid before the date of the return, hence the detenue cannot be released on the ground that his detention was bad at the time of the initiation of the proceedings. The Supreme Court has not laid down the law that in case the detention had become valid after the date of the return, such valid order of detention is not to be taken notice of. As already mentioned, s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

March 6, 1953. In the return, their detention was sought to be justified on the basis of two remand orders, one alleged to have been passed by the Additional District Magistrate at 8 P.M. on March 6, 1953 and the other by a Trial Magistrate at about 3 P.M. on March 9, 1953. The Supreme Court, on looking up the record, found that no valid order of remand had been made on March 9, 1953 at all and after the hearing was over in the case, certain documents were sought to be put on the record in order .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Supreme Court from the record that the detention of said persons was valid. So nothing said in this judgment supports the contention that the Supreme Court has categorically laid down a proposition of law that detention of a particular person is to be shown valid only upto the date of the filing of the return to the show cause notice issued in a habeas corpus petition. 43. In A.K. Gopalan v. Government of India, A.I.R. 1966 Supreme Court 816, the Supreme Court has categorically laid down that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

44. Another judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner is Pranab Chatterjee v. State of Bihar, 1970 (3) Supreme Court Cases 926. The petitioner in the said case had challenged his detention. He was arrested on 9th August 1970 and was not produced before the Magistrate within 24 hours nor was he informed of the grounds. A contention was raised before the Court that the petitioner was arrested not only under Section 151 but also under Sections 151, 107, 117(3) Criminal Procedure C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

etitioner's detention on September 4, 1970 cannot be considered to be illegal because he was kept in detention under proper orders of remand as under trial prisoner. This judgment also does not deal with the legal question arising for decision before us that if the detention of a particular person is justifiable even after a return is filed, could such a person be released even though his detention was illegal for any earlier period? 45. In case of Talib Hussain (supra), a learned Single Hon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that in proceedings of a writ of habeas corpus, the Court is to have regard to the legality or otherwise of the detention at the time of the return and not with reference to the institution of the proceedings. A fortiori the Court would not be concerned with a date prior to the initiation of the proceedings for a writ of habeas corpus. The earlier two Supreme Court judgments in cases of Ram Narayan Singh (supra) and Niranjan Singh Nathawan (supra) were followed. Again, this judgment does not de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n of a particular person becomes valid due to subsequent happenings even upto the date of hearing of the writ petition, still such a person is to be released by issuance of writ of habeas corpus if his detention was invalid upto the date of the filing of the return. 48. In case the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner were to be accepted, it would lead to a very anomalous and drastic result. In the present case, assuming for the sake of argument, the petitioner who is facing regu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t to the notice of the Court, it is too much to say that the Court would not take note of such a future happening. So, we hold that if upto the date of the hearing of the writ petition, it is shown that the detention of a particular person is valid presently, mere fact that his detention had been invalid earlier would not entitle such a petitioner to have any redress in habeas corpus petition. (emphasis supplied) 46. Mr. Mahajan has also referred to a decision of the Full Bench of the Allahabad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

stitutional guarantee enshrined in Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that when he was arrested, he was not informed the grounds of his arrest, and as such, his arrest was in contravention of his rights guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, consequently, contended that since his initial arrest was bad, he was entitled to be released by issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner placed reliance .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er as soon as may be and since it was found that the grounds were not communicated forthwith, hence the Bench found that the detention of the petitioner was rendered illegal. The argument of the State that subsequent knowledge had cured the initial illegality was negatived by holding that the petitioner had the fundamental right to be informed of the grounds of his arrest as soon as could be possible. It may also be noted that Hon. Judges of the High Court also observed that although it was poss .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nch, read as follows: 12. From this observation of their lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of Madhu Limaye ((1969) 1 SCC 292 : AIR 1969 SC 1014) (supra) it is clear that their lordships did not stop after holding in paragraph 13 that Madhu Limaye and others were entitled to be released on the ground of noncompliance of the provisions of Article 22(1) of the Constitution but they further examined the second point formulated in paragraph 7 of the said judgment to examine whether a valid o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rts are not competent to examine in a case similarly placed where despite violation of the provisions of Article 27(1) of the Constitution rendering initial detention illegal that the custody at a subsequent stage had been validated by a valid order of remand passed by the magistrate. 48. Similarly, in respect of Kanu Sanyal (supra), the Full Bench observed as follows: 22. The above mentioned passage quoted from the judgment of Kanu Sanyal((1974) 4 SCC 141 : AIR 1974 SC 510) makes it clear that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion was in accordance with law or not. A perusal of the said judgment indicates that since the Supreme Court found that detention of Kanu Sanyal in Visakhapatnam jail was valid pursuance of the orders of the Special Judge hence the writ petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court. Accordingly in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kanu Sanyal's case the contention of Sri B.S. Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner that if at all initial detention of the petitioner is rendered inv .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

results in an incurable illegality to which the doctrine of curability cannot extend, was rejected and these decisions, and the decisions on which reliance had been placed in these decisions, were overruled. 50. Pertinently, Vimal Kishore Mehrotra (supra) was one of the decisions relied upon by the Court while deciding Ashok Kumar Singh (supra). Thus, the submission of Mr. Mahajan is that reliance placed on Vimal Kishore Mehrotra (supra) is misplaced, since the said decision has been overruled .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

13. He was thereafter produced in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on 01.07.2013, who remanded him to judicial custody by an order passed on the same day. The writ petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court. In his supplementary judgment rendered by T.S. Thakur, J. (as His Lordship then was), the Supreme Court, inter alia, observed: 22. The only question with which we are concerned within the above backdrop is whether the petitioner can be said to be in the unlawful .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion for grant of bail which prayer could be allowed by the court below, having regard to the nature of the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner and the attendant circumstances. The petitioner has for whatever reasons chosen not to do so. He, instead, has been advised to file the present petition in this Court which is no substitute for his enlargement from custody. 23. We are also of the view that the Magistrate has acted rather mechanically in remanding the accused petitioner herein .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

apathy is regrettable to say the least. We also find it difficult to accept the contention that the other accused persons who all belong to one family have absconded. The nature of the offences alleged to have been committed is also not so serious as to probabilise the version of the respondent that the accused have indeed absconded. Suffice it to say that the petitioner is free to make an application for the grant of bail to the court concerned who shall consider the same no sooner the same is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

te had acted mechanically in remanding the accused to judicial custody. It was left open to the petitioner to apply for bail. 53. For this proposition, Mr. Mahajan also relies on Chhagan Chandrakant Bhujbal (supra). In the said case, the issue of maintainability of the writ petition for seeking a writ of habeas corpus was raised by the ED, on the ground that the petitioner being in judicial custody under orders of the competent court established under the PMLA, the said writ would not lie. On be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

th reference to which the legality of the detention can be challenged in a habeas corpus proceeding is a date of filing of the application for habeas corpus and not any other date. As on the date of filing of Habeas Corpus application, the detention of the Petitioner Kanu Sanyal was in the District Jail at Vizakhapatnam, it was held that legality of his earlier detention need not be considered. As regards the third ground, it was held that the conditions laid down were clearly satisfied and henc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

47. … …. The bare perusal of these two Judgments; one in the case of Kanu Sanyal (supra) and the other in the matter of Madhu Limaye (supra), thus, make it clear that both the Judgments pertain to the preventive detention of the Petitioners therein under the provisions of Article 22 of the Constitution and not in respect of the arrest of a person accused of an offence punishable under IPC or under any other special law. Secondly, as per the Judgment in the case of Kanu Sanyal (sup .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er it has to be established that, at the stage of remand, the Magistrate directs detention in the custody without applying his mind to all the relevant matters. As held in the said authority, if the orders of remand are passed by the Magistrate without application of mind and they are patently routine and appear to have been made mechanically, then only, such orders of remand would not cure the Constitutional infirmities in effecting arrest. 48. Thus, the necessary inference that can be drawn fr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re satisfied, the Petition for Habeas Corpus can lie, otherwise, as held in the above-said authority of Kanu Sanyal (supra), if the person is committed to Jail custody by a competent Court by an order, which, prima facie, does not appear to be without jurisdiction or wholly illegal, such Writ of Habeas Corpus can neither be asked for, nor can be granted. 55. The Division Bench also relied upon Manubhai R.P. Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors., (2013) 1 SCC 314, wherein the accused against whom the FIR .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

corpus is not granted when a person is committed to jail custody by a competent court by an order which, prima facie, does not appear to be without jurisdiction or wholly illegal; infirmity in the detention of the petitioner at the initial stage cannot invalidate the subsequent detention and the same has to be judged on its own merits; a petition seeking the writ of habeas corpus on the ground of absence of a valid order or remand or detention of the accused has to be dismissed, if on the date .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Sanyal, the court is required to scrutinize the legality or otherwise of the order of detention which has been passed. Unless the court is satisfied that a person has been committed to jail custody by virtue of an order that suffers from the vice of lack of jurisdiction or absolute illegality, a writ of habeas corpus cannot be granted. It is opposite to note that the investigation, as has been dealt with in various authorities of this Court, is neither an inquiry nor trial. It is within the excl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s, held in para 63 as follows: 63. Therefore, as held in above referred authorities, for the sake of arguments, even assuming that the arrest of the Petitioner was illegal, once it is established that, at the stage of remand of the Petitioner, the Special Court has directed detention of the Petitioner after applying its mind to all the relevant factors, the orders of remand having thus cured the alleged Constitutional infirmities and such orders, prima facie, being not passed without jurisdictio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.09.2017, the judicial custody remand of the petitioner was granted for 14 days till 22.09.2017; vide order dated 22.09.2017, the judicial custody remand of the petitioner was extended till 06.10.2017; vide order dated 06.10.2017, the judicial custody remand of the petitioner was further extended till 17.10.2017; vide order dated 17.10.2017, the judicial custody remand of the petitioner was extended till 25.10.2017, and; thereafter on 23.10.2017, a complaint under Section 44/45 of the PMLA was f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

anded to the ED custody, and thereafter, placed in judicial custody. 58. Mr. Mahajan submits that the petitioner s application to seek bail is pending before the learned Special Judge, and the petitioner is pursuing the same. Though the petitioner s counsel had made his statement on 13.09.2017 that the application seeking regular bail shall not be pressed before the competent Court, subsequently, the said statement was withdrawn by the petitioner through counsel on 23.10.2017. 59. Mr. Anil Soni, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of PMLA. 60. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties. Mr. Handoo has placed reliance on Vimal Kishore Mehrotra (supra) - a Division Bench judgment of Allahabad High Court, and in particular on paragraph 30 of the said decision in support of his submission that decisions of Courts under clause (5) of Article 22 will be of much assistance in interpreting clause (1) of Article 22. However, this decision in Vimal Kishore Mehrotra (supra) stands overruled by the Full Bench decision of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rd the view taken by the Division Bench in Vimal Kishore Mehrotra (supra). However, having considered both the decisions, and on an independent review of the legal position emerging from Limaye (supra) and Kanu Sanyal (supra) - both of which are decisions of the Supreme Court and binding on us, as well as the Full Bench decision of this Court in Rakesh Kumar (supra), we find ourselves in agreement with the Full Bench decision in Bal Mukund Jaiswal (supra) rather than the view taken by the Divisi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ht, namely, of consulting a legal practitioner of his choice and to be defended by him. Clause (2) of Article 22 provides the material safeguard that the arrested person must be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours of such arrest so that an independent authority exercising judicial powers may, without delay, apply its mind to his case. See Madhu Limaye (Supra). ii. Neither Section 19(1) of PMLA nor the definition of the expression 'order' as given in Sub-Clause (h) of Rule 2, of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lied at the time of arrest itself or immediately on arrest, but as soon as may be. See Chhagan Chandrakant Bhujbal (Supra). iii. There is basic and fundamental difference between detention of a person under the provisions of law providing for preventive detention, and detention of a person arrested, accused of commission of an offence. In the case of a person arrested on accusation of commission of an offence, he is required to be produced before the Magistrate within 24 hours. He has the right .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion referred to in Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure need not be, in every case, in writing. What is important is communication, or knowledge, or information regarding the particulars of the offence for which the arrest is made, or the grounds for such arrest. The obligation to forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested in Section 50 of the Code, can be said to be discharged if it is done with all reasonable dispatch and without avoidable del .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hown that the arrest made by the police officer is illegal, it is necessary for the State to establish that, at the stage of remand, the magistrate directed detention in jail custody after applying his mind to all relevant matters. See Madhu Limaye (supra). vi. A writ of habeas corpus is not to be entertained when a person is committed to judicial custody or police custody by the competent Court by an order which prima facie does not appear to be without jurisdiction or passed in an absolutely m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

orpus itself is not maintainable. See Chhagan Chandrakant Bhujbal (Supra). viii. If on the date of the hearing of the writ petition, it is shown that the detention of a particular person is valid, mere fact that his detention had been invalid earlier would not entitle such a petitioner to have any redress in a habeas corpus petition. Even if detention of a particular person is not in accordance with law earlier, but if by happening of subsequent events his detention presently is legally valid, t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. The scheme of Article 22 shows that, on the one hand, it deals with the aspect of arrest - which would, obviously, relate to a possible offence/ crime in which the arrestee may be suspected to be involved and, on the other hand, it deals with the aspect of preventive detention. Article 22 itself draws a distinction between the manner in which the aforesaid two situations would be dealt with. The safeguards provided to the arrestee/ detenue in the case of his arrest/ preventive detention are di .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sions has to be viewed in the context in which they are so used. When a person is arrested and detained in custody, he is entitled to know as to why he is so arrested, so that he is able to remove any mistake, misapprehension or misunderstanding in the mind of the arresting authority and to know exactly what the accusation against him is. This right of the arrestee is enables him to exercise his right to consult a legal practitioner of his choice and his right to be defended by the legal practit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or upon viewing / reading / seeing the same. In either case, the transmission of the information would be complete to the person to whom the information is so transmitted. The arrested person - who is informed of the grounds of arrest verbally, or who is permitted to read the grounds of his arrest which are reduced to writing, would still be able to hold consultations with his legal practitioner with regard to his rights and remedies against his arrest, and to defend himself through a legal pra .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. The decision of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Chhagan Chandrakant Bhujbal (supra) and that of the learned Single Judge of the same Court in Sunil Chainani (supra) appeal to us and we find ourselves in complete agreement with the reasoning adopted by the learned Judges in those decisions. The expression communicate to such person the grounds on which the order has been made … … … used in Article 22(5) has to be interpreted in the context of the purpose for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

inment of the sanction of the Magistrate, or any other judicial authority for continued detention of the detenue beyond the period of 24 hours. The only immediate right available to the detenue is to make a representation against his preventive detention. To be able to effectively exercise that right, it is imperative that the detenue is communicated the grounds on which the order of detention has been made in writing, in a language that he understands, so that he is able to make his representat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the purpose for which the said obligation is cast on the State. The communication of the grounds of preventive detention is to afford to the detenue the earliest opportunity of making an effective representation against the order of detention. Unlike in the case of an arrest referable to Article 22(1), when a person is preventively detained under Article 22(5), there is no obligation on the State to produce the detenue before the nearest Magistrate within 24 hours of detention. The law does n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ake his representation effectively. 69. We also find merit in the submission of Mr. Mahajan that, in the present case, the petitioner was informed of the grounds of his arrest when he was permitted to read the same, against which he also made his endorsement, in writing, as Read . The submission of the petitioner that, as a matter of fact, the petitioner was not permitted to read the grounds of arrest, and merely his endorsement to that effect was taken by the respondent cannot be accepted, sinc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nded before him that the grounds of arrest were not even allowed to be read, and that the endorsement to that effect was falsely or coercively obtained. The relevant extract from the said order reads as follows: 9. It is further stated in the application that grounds of arrest have been informed to him and intimation of arrest has been given to his wife on her mobile phone and the copy of arrest memo has been delivered to him. 10. The application details grounds from a) to l) for ED custody rema .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

scheduled offence is attracted in this case and the application itself is contradictory. 12. To rebut the allegations of non informing of the grounds of the arrest, the ED has shown from the records that the same were informed to the accused at the time of arrest which is evident from their records where the accused has signed after endorsement READ . To that extent, the Ld. Spl. PP or ED has argued that statute has been complied in letter and spirit . 70. Pertinently, Section 19 of the PMLA al .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

thority shall immediately after arrest of such person under sub-Section (1) … … … forward a copy of the order of arrest, along with the material in his possession - on the basis of which the reasonable belief is formed that the person is guilty of an offence punishable under the Act, in a sealed envelope to the Adjudicating Authority, which the Adjudicating Authority is obliged to keep under his custody. 71. We may also observe that the obligation cast on the Competent Autho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

when a detailed application was moved before the learned Special Judge on 26.08.2017, i.e. the day following his arrest, setting out the materials which also virtually contain the grounds of his arrest. The said application was, admittedly, served upon the petitioner on 26.08.2017. The said application under Section 167 Cr.P.C. read with Section 65 PMLA seeking ED custody remand of the petitioner, inter alia, states that: 2. During the course of investigation certain facts, which are based on r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

amount of money from different persons for obtaining undue favours from public servants at the extant time after exercising his personal influence by using corrupt practices through illegal means, thereby influencing them. 4. Also, various incriminating documents which have been recovered during our searches at various premises of Moin Akhtar Qureshi and his associates (under the FEMA) revealed as under: a) Moin Akhtar Qureshi, through his company named as India Premier Services Pvt. Ltd. (IPSP .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

confidential information to Moin Akhtar Qureshi about various details viz-a-viz movement of the file etc. In order to secure security clearance, other public servants not connected with the case were malafidely influencing the officers concerned to accord permission. Some conversations indicate money changing hands. However, the permission was not granted due to reservation of Intelligence Agencies. b) There are many conversations and BBM messages exchanged between Moin Akhtar Qureshi and the ac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ined the money for themselves or through their kin. In support of this two public persons/ witnesses Satish Sana and Pradeep Koneru came forward and provided their statements that they had paid crores of rupees to Moin Qureshi to help them in getting relief from investigating agency, CBI. c) There are conversations to the effect that he has been regularly sending gifts to various Govt. servants holding important and sensitive position who obtained the illegal gratification or pecuniary advantage .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nts that that they have delivered crores of rupees for Moin Akhtar Qureshi and his associates through his employee Aditya Sharma. 7. One of the witness in his statement stated that approx. ₹ 1.75 Crore have been extorted by Moin Qureshi from him and his friend in lieu of the help provided to him in a CBI Case. 8. Another witness in his statement stated that he had to pay more than 5 crores of rupees to Moin Qureshi as he was extorting money from him for providing help in his family case wi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

M/s South Delhi Money Changer (Damini) in GK-1 owned by D.S. Anand. From the search conducted at Parvez Ali s premises various documents have been seized, the analysis of which revealed entries of Huge amount of Hawala transactions made by Parvez Ali for Moin Qureshi and his Wife Mrs. Nasreen Qureshi to various foreign Destinations. The Money was found transferred through hawala channels to Dubai and Hong Kong. From Dubai the money was further transferred via TT to the desired locations like Pa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xorbitant expenses of Moin Qureshi s family and investments. The facts have been revealed from the documents found in the analysis of the technical data. In this way more than 4 crores of hawala transactions has been found recorded in the books of Parvez Ali. 13. Moin Qureshi has incorporated foreign entities M/s Barro Holdings, M/s Bulova Holdings at Seychelles a 100% beneficiary of these companies. Respective Bank accounts of these companies were opened in BSI, AG Bank in Singapore, Hong Kong .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t, became aware of the grounds of his arrest when he and his legal practitioner were provided with a copy of the application under Section 167 Cr.P.C. read with Section 65 PMLA dated 26.08.2017 to seek his ED custody remand. We may again observe that according to the respondents, he was informed of the same by permitting him to read the grounds of arrest against his acknowledgement at the time of his arrest. 74. The submission of Mr. Handoo, premised on the definition of the expression order con .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

levance to the facts of the present case. 75. Thus, we reject the first submission of Mr. Handoo that the arrest of the petitioner under Section 19(1) of the PMLA itself was illegal. We are of the view that the grounds of arrest were duly informed to the petitioner at the time of his arrest, as well as soon thereafter i.e. on the following day, in the form of the remand application moved before the learned Special Judge. 76. The further submission of Mr. Handoo premised on paragraph 15 of the re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

his submission that paragraph 15 of the remand application under Section 167 Cr.P.C. read with Section 65 of the PMLA dated 26.08.2017 shows that the arrest has been made without formation of such belief, and on account of the apprehension that the petitioner is in possession of more evidences in this case and he is withholding/ not divulging the same, thus will jeopardise the investigation under PMLA, 2002 . As contended by Mr. Handoo, the power of arrest vested in the Competent Authority under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Act. The reasons for the said belief can be gathered from paragraphs 2 to 14 of the said application, which we have extracted hereinabove. 77. In the present case, as we have noticed hereinabove, after his arrest on 25.08.2017, the petitioner was produced before the learned Special Judge on 26.08.2017 when he was remanded to ED custody till 31.08.2017. The present petition was preferred after the said remand of the petitioner by the learned Special Judge under Section 167 Cr.P.C. read with Sect .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pus in respect of a person who is detained under the orders of a Competent Court. It is equally well-settled by a catena of decisions, taken note of hereinabove, that the earliest date with reference to which the illegality of detention may be examined in a Habeas Corpus proceeding, is the date on which the application for Habeas Corpus is made to the Court, if nothing more has intervened between the date of the application and the date of hearing. The decisions taken note of hereinabove show th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e (supra), Kanu Sanyal (supra), Niranjan Singh Nathawan (supra), Ram Narayan Singh (supra), A.K. Gopalan (supra), Pranab Chatterjee (supra), Talib Hussain (supra) and Col. Dr. B. Ramachandra Rao (supra), held that if, up to the date of hearing of the writ petition, it is shown that the detention/ arrest of the person is valid, the mere fact that his detention had been invalid earlier, would not entitle such a person to have any redress in a Habeas Corpus petition. 79. Faced with the aforesaid po .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

which shows that the learned Special Judge not only perused the said application, but also applied his mind to the contents thereof. The learned Special Judge takes note of the averment made in the application that the grounds of arrest have been informed to the petitioner, and intimation of his arrest has been given to his wife and a copy of the arrest memo has been delivered to him. The learned Special Judge also takes note of the grounds for seeking the ED custody remand of the petitioner, a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

owing the remand application by observing: 17. Considering the seriousness of the allegations and to enable the ED to complete thorough investigation, ED custody remand of Moin Akhtar Qureshi for five days i.e. 31.08.2017 is granted. 80. Pertinently, though the ED sought the ED custody remand for 14 days, the learned Special Judge granted the same, in the first instance, only till 31.08.2017, i.e. for about 5 days, which also betrays application of mind by the learned Special Judge while passing .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd . He also records the submission of the ED that: investigation with regard to properties outside India is also to be conducted and audio recording conversation is to be confronted to the accused and CERT-IN has also been requested with regard to e-mail server. He further submits that there is involvement of Shell Companies, it is not a case of single transaction and law provides fourteen days police custody 82. The reason given by the learned Special Judge while granting further ED custody re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

umstances, ED custody remand of accused Sh. Moin Akhtar Qureshi is extended to another four days i.e. till 04.09.2017. 83. Once again, when the order dated 04.09.2017 was passed on the third application moved by the ED under Section 167 of the Code read with Section 65 of the PMLA for ED custody remand of the petitioner, the learned Special Judge took into account the submissions advanced by the applicant/ ED and extended the ED custody remand of the petitioner till 08.09.2017. The relevant extr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

statements of bank accounts which are to be further investigated from the parties with whom transactions were carried out by the accused. 5. Lastly, it is also stated that the accused is to be confronted with audio data obtained from the Income Tax Department. 6. Learned counsel for the accused reiterated his submissions made at the time of the first and second remand. 7. Considering the submissions of learned counsels, ED custody of accused Sh. Moin Akhtar Qureshi is extended for four days till .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ents of public servants, private persons are yet to be recorded and more properties have surfaced acquired from proceeds of crime. He further stated that statement of HAWALA operator is being recorded and release of accused at this stage shall hamper the investigation. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for accused strongly opposed the Judicial Custody remand. He submits that the application for Judicial Custody remand is concealing more facts than revealing. Considering the submissions of the Ld. S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nsic reports and technical surveillances. Let us (sic- letters) have been issued to banks and different government agencies to provide records. The hard disk data in respect of e-mails for the transmission of documents two various countries are being investigated. Summons to witnesses have been issued and they are yet to be examined. The investigation is in progress. The application is strongly opposed by the Ld. Counsel for accused on the ground that the Custody is not required for further inve .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ngs the petitioner had made a statement through counsel that he shall not press his application for regular bail before the Competent Court till the next date of hearing, which got extended from 09.10.2017 to 16.10.2017; and from 16.10.2017 to 17.10.2017 and; from 17.10.2017 to 23.10.2017. On 23.10.2017, the complaint under Section 45 of the PMLA was filed by the Director of ED, whereon cognizance was taken by the learned Special Judge against the accused persons, including the petitioner herein .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n his continuing judicial custody. The petitioner has statutory remedy of seeking regular bail from the Competent Court under Section 45 of the PMLA. Thus, there was no question of this Court being called to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus for release of the petitioner when he is continuing in judicial custody. Not only his present judicial custody appears to be legal, but his initial arrest on 25.08.2017, and his subsequent remand to ED custody on successive occasions, and his eventual judicial r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version