The Magistrate has the jurisdiction to issue a warrant of production under section 267 of the Criminal Procedure Code to produce an accused before him for the purpose of considering the request of the Investigating Officer to order his detention in police custody.

Headnote:
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTIONS 267, 167, 57, 56, 41(1) - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - ARREST, REMAND, PRODUCTION OF ACCUSED IN CUSTODY - JURISDICTION OF MAGISTRATE - SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION - ROLE OF INVESTIGATING AGENCY - PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS - JUDICIAL INTERFERENCE - LIMITS - CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM - AIMS AND OBJECTIVES - DISCUSSION.
Fact of the Case:

The case involved a non-applicant/accused, Yadav s/o Nathuji Kohachade, who was arrested for offering a bribe to a Police Officer. The accused was initially granted police custody remand for seven days, followed by a further seven days. However, the accused moved an application for bail, and the Court granted an interim stay on the remand order. The prosecution challenged this order, arguing that it was scuttling the investigation in the case.
Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the Magistrate was justified in issuing a warrant of production under section 267 of the Criminal Procedure Code to produce the accused before him for the purpose of considering the request of the Investigating Officer to order his detention in police custody. The Court also observed that the investigation has to be done with a sense of urgency and the Court should extend all possible assistance to the investigating agency, subject to the constitutional right and procedural safeguards available to an accused person.
Issues: 1. Whether the Magistrate had the jurisdiction to issue a warrant of production under section 267 of the Criminal Procedure Code to produce the accused before him for the purpose of considering the request of the Investigating Officer to order his detention in police custody? 2. Whether the Court should interfere with the investigation process?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Magistrate had the jurisdiction to issue a warrant of production under section 267 of the Criminal Procedure Code to produce the accused before him for the purpose of considering the request of the Investigating Officer to order his detention in police custody. The Court observed that the words "other proceedings and any proceedings under the Code" in section 267 of the Criminal Procedure Code include all steps taken in furtherance of prosecution, i.e., arrest, remand, interrogation, and investigation. 2. The Court held that the Court should not interfere with the investigation process unless it is brought to the notice of the Court that there is any violation of fundamental rights of an accused person and/or the investigation is done contrary to the procedural safeguards and by violation of the rights of an accused, thereby assuring the accused procedural justice.
Final Decision: The Court made the rule absolute and directed the parties to appear before the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, for the disposal of the concerned Revision Application in accordance with law.

JUDGMENT - J.N. PATEL, J.:---Heard the learned A.P.P. for the applicant State and the learned Counsel for the non applicant.

The State of Maharashtra was required to approach this Court by invoking its powers of revision as well as its inherent powers impugning the order of the First Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Criminal Revision No- 490/99 passed on 3rd July, 1999, under which the learned First Additional Sessions Judge having partly dictated the order went on to observe, "The fate of this revision is based on the findings of the proceeding before the Hon'ble High Court. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it will not be just and proper on the part of this Court to proceed with this revision till the decision of the proceedings pending before the Hon'ble High Court. Therefore, the interim stay granted by this Court on dated 28-6-1999 shall continue until further orders."

2. This, according to the prosecution, has resulted in scuttling the investigation in case of offences registered under sections 420, 468 and 471 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, vide Crime No. 194/99 against the non-applicant/accused by Sitabuldi Police Station, Nagpur.

3. The brief facts which led to the arrest of the non applicant/accused, Yadav s/o Nathuji Kohachade is that while P.S.I. Anil Lokhande was investigating Crime No. 99/99, he received a phone call from the non applicant accused on 18-6-1999, pursuant to which, a meeting was held and the Police Officer was offered a bribe of Rs. 7,00,000/- for not involving the non applicant/accused and one Banty Uike. The Police Officer, rather than accepting the bribe, appears to have reported the matter to the Anti Corruption Bureau which laid a trap, in which the non applicant/accused was caught red-handed while offering bribe to the concerned Police Officer. The Anti Corruption Bureau registered Crime No. 3119/99 against the non applicant/accused under section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The non applicant accused was then produced before the Special Judge seeking his remand for the purposes of investigation. The Special Judge initially granted Police Custody Remand for a period of seven days, i.e., till 25-6-1999. On 25-6-1999, the non applicant/accused was produced before the "Special Judge and further police custody was sought, which was granted till 28-6-1999. In the meantime, the non applicant/accused moved an application for bail in Crime No. 3119/99. After Police Custody Remand of the non applicant accused was over, he was produced before the Special Judge on 28-6-1999. As no further request for police custody was sought, he came to be remanded to the judicial custody and was sent to the Central Prison, Nagpur.

4. On 28-6-1999, the Investigation Officer in Crime No. 194/99 moved an application before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No. 2, Nagpur, for transferring of the non applicant/accused to his custody for the purposes of investigation. On this, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No. 2, sent a request letter to the Special Court, Nagpur. Therefore, the Special Court, Nagpur, is supposed to have placed all these matters before him on 30th June, 1999, i.e., the bail application filed by the non applicant-accused as well as the request of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No. 2, for consideration. In the meantime, the prosecution filed an application in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No. 2, Nagpur, on 29-6-1999, seeking a production warrant so as to seek custody of the non applicant accused for the purpose of investigation in Crime No- 194/99. This application came to be granted by the learned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate issued a warrant of production addressed to the Superintendent of Jail for production of the non applicant/accused. Pursuant to this production warrant, the Investigating Officer took over the custody of the non applicant/accused from Jail and produced him before the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1999 Supreme(Bom) 496

The Magistrate has the jurisdiction to issue a warrant of production under section 267 of the Criminal Procedure Code to produce an accused before him for the purpose of considering the request of the Investigating Officer to order his detention in police custody.

Cases Referred (1)