Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.—Heard Mr. Dinu Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. P.N. Sharma, learned AC to learned Advocate General representing the State of Bihar.

2. The petitioner is related to one Saket Bhushan, who has been described in the present writ petition as "maternal devar" of the petitioner.

3. In nutshell, it is the petitioner's case is that Saket Bhushan was arrested either by the officials of Khagaul Police Station or a Special Investigation Team(SIT) on 31.01.2021 at 8:30 pm from ‘Patna Tyre Mall’ situated near ‘Saguna Morh’ in connection with a murder case. The petitioner has filed the present writ application with a grievance that immediately after his arrest on 31.01.2021, said Saket Bhushan was not produced before the Judicial Magistrate and even after expiry of 24 hours of his arrest he had not been produced before the Magistrate. It is the petitioner’s case that the arrest and detention of Saket Bhushan is illegal and contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in case of D.K. Basu vs. the State of West Bengal reported in (1997) 1 SCC 416. The petitioner is accordingly seeking a declaration to the aforesaid effect and a direction commanding the respondents State of Bihar to produce him forthwith. The petitioner is seeking a further direction to award due compensation to the petitioner/ Saket Bhushan to recompense his illegal detention after his arrest without producing him before the concerned Magistrate within 24 hours from his arrest on 30.01.2021 at 8:30 pm.

4. Mr. Dinu Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has argued that the arrest of Saket Bhushan and his subsequent detention without his production before the concerned Magistrate is in breach of the provisions under Section 41A, 41B, 41D, 50, 50A and 56 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Such breach of the statutory provisions constitutes offence punishable under Section 166 of the Indian Penal Code. He has argued that the victim of illegal detention by the police is legally entitled also for due compensation.

5. He has argued, based on pleadings in the writ petition, that for illegal arrest and illegal detention, humiliation and mental torture and harm in reputation, said Saket Bhushan is entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs. 5 lakhs. It is also his submission that said Saket Bhushan was apprehended with a motorcycle which too has not been produced before the learned ACJM, Patna City. He has placed reliance on a Division Bench decision of this Court rendered on 22.12.2020 in CWJC No. 333 of 2020 in support of his contention.

6. The writ petition was filed on 31.08.2021 and came to be registered on 05.04.2021. A counter affidavit was earlier filed on 08.10.2021 sworn by the City Superintendent of Police (Central) Patna. In the said counter affidavit, a preliminary objection has been taken over maintainability of the writ petition with a plea that said Saket Bhushan is neither missing nor is in custody/detention. It has been stated in paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit as under:—

'That other allegations leveled by the petitioner against the respondent authority are also not maintainable as being devoid of merit. Saket Bhushan was never arrested by Khagaul PS in any case, rather he was brought by a police officer of Shastri Nagar PS on 02/02/21 at 21:45 hours in connection with an enquiry in the murder of one Rupesh Kumar Singh, the airport station manager of Indigo and after the enquiry he left the police station premises on 03/02/2021 at 18:00 hours safely without any grievance after executing bond in presence of a witness. Saket Bhushan has mentioned in his bond that he is safely leaving for his house after recording his statement. He and one witness namely Manoranjan Kumar put their signature on the bond paper voluntarily. In this respect a SD entry no. 90 at 18:00 hours was also made.'

7. It has further been stated that a Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted to investi