Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Manoj Jain, JJ.
Dharam Narayan Gautam - Appellant
Versus
State Through Economic Offences Wing & Anr. - Respondents
W.P.(Cr) 304 of 2024 & Cr.M.A 2793 of 2024
Decided On : 29-01-2024
Habeas Corpus - Illegal Detention - Cr.P.C. Section 269(c), W.P.(CRL.) 822/2020 - The court discussed the illegal detention of the petitioner despite the receipt of bail and release orders, and the lack of a live production warrant. The court directed the immediate release of the petitioner and ordered the state to take appropriate action against the erring officers. The court also emphasized the need to follow the directions contained in order dated 19.05.2020 in W.P.(CRL.) 822/2020.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was illegally detained despite the receipt of bail and release orders, and the lack of a live production warrant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was in unauthorized judicial custody and directed the immediate release of the petitioner. The court also directed the state to take appropriate action against the erring officers and emphasized the need to follow the directions contained in order dated 19.05.2020 in W.P.(CRL.) 822/2020.
Issues: Illegal detention, lack of live production warrant, failure to release the petitioner despite bail and release orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of immediate release upon receipt of bail and release orders, the lack of a live production warrant, and the need to take appropriate action against erring officers.
Final Decision: The court directed the immediate release of the petitioner and ordered the state to take appropriate action against the erring officers. The court also emphasized the need to follow the directions contained in order dated 19.05.2020 in W.P.(CRL.) 822/2020.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Present petition, which is in the nature of Habeas Corpus, has been filed with the following prayer:
"(a) Issue an order, direction or writ in the nature of Heabus Corpus, or any other appropriate writ order directing immediate release of the Petitioner from custody at Tihar Jail."
2. It is claimed that despite bail order and release order, he has been illegally detained by Jail Authorities.
3. As per status report dated 29.01.2024, it is admitted that bail order/release order of the petitioner was received in Jail on 20.01.2024. However, he was not released as there was one production warrants, albeit expired one, against him.
4. A wireless message was sent to DAP 3rd Battalion by Jail Authorities to depute appropriate guards to produce the petitioner before the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) F.T.C, G.B Nagar, for further necessary directions in such out-station case pending there.
5. Since as per one previously received letter dated 14.12.2023 from Dy. Commissioner of Police, 3rd Battalion DAP, New Delhi, intimating that the DAP 3rd Battalion would not be in a position to discharge their duties for court production in Delhi & NCR from 19.01.2024 to 27.01.2024 on account of Republic Day arrangements, the custody of petitioner/accused is stated to have been handed over to DAP 3rd Battalion today only i.e. on 29.01.2024 for his production before the Court at G.B Nagar for further necessary directions.
6. It is not in dispute that Jail Authorities at Delhi have no idea about the next date in said out-station case and they do not even know whether accused is on bail there or not. Importantly, there is no live production warrant either.
7. It is admitted case of the State/Jail Authority that the production warrant dated 30.09.2022 had been received from F.T.C, G.B Nagar and consequent thereto, the petitioner was to be produced on 10.10.2022.
8. It is also admitted that the petitioner was never produced on the said date before the concerned Court. No further production warrant was received either in such out-station case.
9. Bail order in the case in Delhi was passed on 16.01.2024 and release order was issued by the concerned Court on 20.01.2024 and was received by Tihar Jail, New Delhi same day.
10. Such fact has not been disputed by Mr. Sanjay Beniwal, Director General (Prisons), Delhi who is present in Court.
11. This Court put a specific query to the said DG (Prisons) enquiring as to what steps have been taken pursuant to the directions passed in W.P.(CRL.) 822/2020 in case of Anil Mittal versus State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. on 19.05.2020. He submits that he has joined the present post about an year back and pursuant to said order dated 19.05.2020, circular dated 05.08.2020 has already been issued, which, inter alia, provides as under:
"To avoid any such occasions where delay in release of an inmate is caused owing to clarification about the bail status in an already existing production warrant (especially such situations arise when an inmate in Delhi Prisons has a production warrant from an outstation court), it is reiterated that we any immediately, seek the clarification/confirmation from the concerned Court about the bail status of such other case in which the production warrant is received in Jail, preferably within 24 hours of receiving the production warrant, with specific remarks that the accused will be released from Jail in case he/she secures bail/release orders in the case/cases in which he has been committed to judicial custody in our jail in view of Section 269(c) of Cr.P.C.
Secondly, it has also come to the notice of the Director General (Prisons) that a prisoner was unlawfully detained in a pending Criminal Appeal on account of live warrant against him ignoring the fact that the sentence awarded to him had been completed/undergone already and the appellant (in this case the victim) had sought only the enhancement o punishment imposed against the petitioner (accused). In such case o Criminal Appea
Immediate release upon receipt of bail and release orders, lack of live production warrant, and the need to take appropriate action against erring officers.
The principle that personal liberty cannot be infringed without lawful authority, and that once bail is granted, an individual cannot be detained without a valid order.
A writ of habeas corpus cannot be granted if detention is legally sanctioned; procedural delays due to valid medical conditions do not render custody illegal.
Illegal detention without due process violates Article 21 of the Constitution, warranting compensation for the affected individual.
The court ruled that the petitioner was not entitled to default bail as he was lawfully shown arrested after the final complaint was submitted.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while virtual production for detention in judicial custody is permissible, irregularities in the extension of remand may not warrant a writ of....
A prisoner cannot be kept in detention once a valid bail order and release warrant have been issued, unless there is a specific, lawful order of arrest or remand pertaining to another case.
Sec. 437 of Code makes a provision for persons who have been arrested in a non-bailable offence and have been produced before a Magistrate.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
