The main legal point established in the judgment is that the detention of the petitioner was lawful and authorized, considering the pending criminal cases and the issuance of non-bailable warrants.

Dinesh Maheshwari, J.

1. The petitioner, who has been ordered to be enlarged on bail by way of the order dated 15.02.2017 in relation to Sessions Case No.26(T) of 2013 pending in the Court of Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), East Khasi Hills District, Shillong, but who has not been set at liberty as yet, has filed this writ petition essentially seeking a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus while also seeking other writs in the nature of Certiorari and Prohibition against such orders and actions of the authorities concerned, whereby his detention is sought to be continued in the name of pendency of other criminal cases and the requirements of his production therein.

2. As noticed hereafter, the petitioner is, and has been, involved in several criminal cases registered at different Police Stations in the State of Meghalaya. It appears that the trial in the aforesaid Sessions Case No.26(T) of 2013 has been taken up in the Court of Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), East Khasi Hills District, Shillong, in relation to Pynursla P.S. Case No.25(7) of 2012 and relates to offences under Sections 121/121A Indian Penal Code ['IPC'] read with Sections 16,18,38(1) and 38(2) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 ['UAP Act'] and Section 12 of the Indian Passport Act, 1967 ['IP Act'].

3. It appears further that the said trial has reached to the stage of recording of the statement of the accused petitioner. Therein, the petitioner moved an application for bail, which was finally considered and allowed by the learned Trial Court on 15.12.2017.

4. The case of the petitioner is that despite having complied with the bail order, he has not been set at liberty. It is also contended that the bail order itself was supplied belatedly and only on 22.02.2017.

5. The grievances of the petitioner have the genesis in the fact that on 22.02.2017, the Jail authorities at Shillong District Jail received an order from the Additional District Magistrate, Baghmara, South Garo Hills District directing them to produce the petitioner before him through a video link in connection with Baghmara P.S. Case No. 62 (10) of 2011 for offences under Sections 365/34 IPC. According to the petitioner, the Jail authorities attempted to produce him before the said Additional District Magistrate, Baghmara through video link from Shillong at 4.30 p.m. on 22.02.2017 but the video link could not be established, and thereupon, a second order was issued by ADM, Baghmara that the petitioner may be produced at 11.00 a.m. the next morning.

6. It is submitted that on the next date i.e. 23.02.2017, the petitioner was produced before the learned Trial Court at Shillong for recording of his statement under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C'); and after recording of the statements, the Trial Court accepted his bail bonds and the release notice was signed. The petitioner has also pointed out that an application was moved on his behalf apprising the Trial Court of the order of the ADM, Baghmara and raising questions against the same; and after moving of the said application, the Trial Court forwarded the release notice to the jail authorities at about 4:45 p.m. on 23.02.2017. It is also alleged that after receipt of the release notice, the Jail authorities abstained from the production of the petitioner in view of the requirements of Sections 269 (c) Cr.P.C since the period of his custody had already expired.

7. The petitioner submits that the Additional District Magistrate, Baghmara, thereafter, directed the Jail authorities over telephone that the release notice be not processed and the petitioner be kept in custody until the time a formal custody warrant was issued in Baghmara PS Case No. 62 (10) of 2011. Thus, the Jail authorities refused to release him on 23.02.2017.

8. With reference to the aforesaid facts and, of course, while placing on record certain other orders (relevant aspects whereof shall be noticed hereafter), the petitioner has alleg