The failure to obtain a transit warrant and produce the accused within 24 hours constitutes a violation of Article 22(2) of the Constitution, rendering the detention unlawful.

ORDER :

G. RADHA RANI, J.

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner – accused No.44 under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) to set aside the order of remand dated 02.02.2024 against him in Crime No.958 of 2023 of S.R. Nagar Police Station, Hyderabad on the file of the III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad registered for the offences under Sections 8(c) read with 22(c), 27 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).

2. The case of the prosecution in brief was that on 16.12.2023 at 18:30 hours, the S.I. of Police of S.R. Nagar Police Station on credible information that a person who was in possession of psychotropic substance was at Maitrivanam, Ameerpet, S.R. Nagar, Hyderabad proceeded to the said place and on identification by the informant, apprehended a person by name Jalli Ashok Yadav (accused No.4) and seized two (02) ecstasy (psychotropic substance) pills from his possession. On interrogation, accused No.4 confessed that he along with his friend Rajesh was procuring the ecstacy pills from one Sai Charan of Bangalore and one Baba of Goa @ Rs.1,000/- per pill and were selling them at Hyderabad @ Rs.3,000/- per pill to needy customers. As per the instruction of Rajesh on 12.12.2023, he went to Goa and procured 60 ecstasy pills from Baba, resident of Goa by paying Rs.60,000/- and came to Hyderabad and handed over to Rajesh. On 16.02.2024, Rajesh gave 2 ecstasy pills to him to sell the same to their regular customers. As per the instructions of Rajesh, he came to Maitrivanam, S.R. Nagar, Hyderabad and waiting for their regular customers. Basing on the said confession of accused No.4, the above case was registered by the S.R. Nagar police station as F.I.R. No.958 of 2023 under Section 8(c) read with 22(c), 27 and 29 of NDPS Act.

2.1. It was further alleged that A3, A4 and A45 were drug peddlers, A1, A2, A5, A6 and A39 to A44 were supplying the drugs to A3, A4 and A45 and A7, A8 to A27 and A46 to A48 were consumers.

2.2. The further case of the prosecution was that on 30.01.2024, the Inspector of Police, S.R. Nagar received credible information that the present petitioner-A44 was available at his residence at 630, Munang Waddo, near Hindu Cremation Animal Rescue, Assagao, Bardez, Goa and deputed the S.I. of Police of S.R. Nagar police station along with two constables to apprehend the accused and they proceeded on a four-wheeler to Goa. On 01.02.2024 at about 12:00 hours, they reached the said address and found the accused person in the house and took him into custody and tried to interrogate him. The petitioner-A44 had not co-operated to record his confession statement. As his family members and surrounding people gathered, the S.I. of police brought him to the nearest police station i.e., Anjuna police station of Goa and conducted interrogation. The petitioner-A44 voluntarily admitted his guilt. Satisfied about his involvement in the offence, the S.I. effected the arrest of the accused at 13:00 hours on 01.02.2024 and intimated to his brother under proper acknowledgment. After completion of arrest formalities, the S.I. left from there to Hyderabad. It was alleged that there was no time to take transit warrant from the Court.

2.3. It was mentioned in the remand report that the petitioner-A44 being a notorious habitual criminal had contacts with many drug suppliers in Goa and if they waited for taking transit warrant from Court, his associates/drug suppliers/drug peddlers might be attacking them, as such, brought him immediately to Hyderabad. On 02.02.2024, they produced the petitioner-A44 before the Inspector. Immediately, his confession-cum-seizure panchanama was recorded by the Inspector and sent the petitioner-A44 for medical checkup and produced before the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

2.4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused appeared before the Magistr