Does the re-arrest procedure apply also where Article 22(2) is breached by detention beyond twenty-four hours?
Coram: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan · Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
The procedure for re-arrest after release applies also where Article 22(2) is breached by detention beyond twenty-four hours.
Yes. The same procedure, an application before the Magistrate with the superior authority's endorsement, has to be followed when there is a breach of clause (2) of Article 22 and the investigating agency still wants custody after release. Depending on the facts, the High Court may also direct payment of compensation as part of the public law remedy, with liberty to the accused to avail his remedy under the private civil law.
Constitution of India — Art.22(1) — Art.22(2) — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss.50, 57 — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — ss.47, 58 — Re-Arrest — Grounds Of Arrest In Writing — Judicial Imprimatur — Compensation — Constitution of India — Art.22(1) — Written Grounds Of Arrest — Breach Vitiates Arrest — Held: Under Article 22(1), the grounds of arrest must be furnished to the accused in writing, in a language he understands, as a matter of course. Breach vitiates the arrest, no question of prejudice arises, and release is not on bail. (¶23) Constitution of India — Art.22(1) — Re-Arrest After Release — Judicial Imprimatur — Held further: After release for breach of Article 22(1), re-arrest cannot be left to the discretion of the police who violated it. The investigating agency must apply to the Magistrate for custody, with reasons, after furnishing the grounds, with the superior's endorsement. (¶24, 25) Constitution of India — Art.22(2) — Production Within Twenty-Four Hours — Compensation — Held further: The same procedure applies where Article 22(2) is breached, and the High Court may direct payment of compensation as a public law remedy, with liberty to avail the private civil law remedy. (¶36) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Default Bail — Re-Arrest Does Not Apply — Held further: Decisions permitting re-arrest after default bail do not apply, as both infringements here were at the threshold of arrest. Appeal allowed; High Court order quashed. (¶34, 35, 38)
Headnote
You've used your free headnotes this month
The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.
Create my free accountOne judgment a day. That's the whole habit.
Read the full text of JASKARAN JEET SINGH DEOL v. STATE OF PUNJAB — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.
Create my free accountFree forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India