IMPORTANT POINT
IMPORTANT POINT
The period of apprehension must be included in the 24-hour limit for producing an arrested person before a magistrate, ensuring compliance with constitutional rights.

ORDER :

(P. Sam Koshy, J.) :

Heard Mr. Yemmiganur Soma Srinath Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the learned Advocate General, for the respondents.

2. The present is a second writ petition seeking for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus by the same petitioner, and by way of the present writ petition the petitioner herein seeks for production of the four detenus viz., Thallapally Srinivas Goud,Thallapally Sai Sharath, Thallapally Sai Rohith and Palavalasa Siva Saran. This writ petition has been filed substantially on two questions of law, which are:-

a) Whether the period of apprehension by the police authorities before the official arrest being shown is also to be considered for the purpose of fulfilling the requirement of producing the so-called apprehended person before the Judicial Magistrate within 24 hours?

b) Whether an accused under the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1996 (for short ‘TSPDFE Act’) can be produced for the first remand before the nearest Judicial Magistrate or he needs to be presented only before the concerned notified Special Court?

3. The aforesaid four detenus are said to be accused and arrested for the offences punishable under Section 406, 420 read with 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and Section 5 of the TSPDFE Act. The petitioner on an earlier occasion had filed another writ petition seeking for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus i.e. Writ Petition No.21034 of 2024. When the said writ petition was filed, the grounds raised in the present writ petition were not available and it was filed at the stage of their apprehension itself and subsequently when the matter came up for hearing, the said writ petition was disposed of in the light of the submissions made by the learned Government Counsel as regards the official arrest of the four detenus being made and they being sent on judicial remand vide order dated 02.08.2024. The said writ petition was rejected on the very same day i.e. on 02.08.2024 itself. That subsequently after obtaining necessary documents and records, the present writ of Habeas Corpus has been filed raising two substantial questions of law which have been framed in the beginning of this order.

4. As regards the first question is concerned, the undisputed fact which is revealed from the order of first remand itself is that the accused Nos.3 and 4 were apprehended at 10:00 A.M. on 31.07.2024. From the Counter affidavit filed by respondent No.4 and which is not in dispute is that after having apprehended accused Nos.3 and 4 at around 10:00 A.M. on 31.07.2024, the police team proceeded to Beeramguda in search of the other accused. On 01.08.2024 at around 00:30 hours, accused No.1 Thallapally Sai Rohith, accused No.2 ThallaMamatha and accused No.6 Palavalasa Siva Saran were found at their residence at Beeramguda and the police apprehended them for questioning and at around 01:30 hours on 01.08.2024 they were brought to Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, and took them into custody and the arrest was shown on 01.08.2024 at 15:40 hours. That after completing all the formalities, all the alleged detenues were produced before the concerned Judicial Magistrate at his residence at Hasthinapuram on 02.08.2024 at 12:30 A.M. Thus, from the finding of facts as per the Counter affidavit itself, the accused persons were officially apprehended and subsequently produced before the Judicial Magistrate as indicated in the table below :