SHER BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all the aforesaid four cases one of the points argued was that at the time of arrest of the petitioner in each case the ground of arrest and full particulars regarding it were not disclosed and, therefore, Art. 22(1) of the Constitution of India stood violated. The other question in all the four cases was whether the petitioner was detained for a period more than necessary and in some beyond 24 hours and, therefore, Art. 22(2) of the Constitution of India was violated. On these two grounds it was argued that the continued detention of the petitioner in each case was illegal. Some questions of fact were raised relating to each case which shall be dealt with at the relevant place. It may be noted here that in all the cases counter affidavits by the relevant opposite parties have been filed to which a rejoinder has also been filed by the petitioner and, therefore, as prayed by learned counsel for the parties, all the petitions are being finally disposed at the admission stage. Sri R. P. Singh, Sri S. V. Goswami, Sri Prem Prakash Yadav and Sri D. S. Misra have been heard on behalf' of the petitioners in each case respectively while Sri Shivaji Misra has appeared on behalf of the opposite parties, all of whom have been heard at sufficient length.

(2.) The facts in each case as pleaded by the respective sides are noted below : (1) Sher Bahadur Singh's petition. Petitioner's case State's case

(3.) From the statement of the cases contained above the fact is apparent. The petitioners in each case have already been remanded to judicial custody when they were produced before the Magistrate concerned. The question posed was that since presently there is a valid order remanding them to judicial custody, even if there was a prior jnfringement either of Art. 22(1) or 22(2) of the Constitution or S. 50 of the Cr. P.C., the said illegality stood cured and in any case has become irrelevant.