SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Vs. SUBHASH BISHNOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Counsel for the State submits that certified copy of the impugned order has already been filed, therefore, in such view, defect pointed out by the Office stands removed.

(2.) State by way of instant petition has impugned order dtd. 12/4/2024 passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur Metro-II, directing conditional release of accused-respondents, declaring non-compliance of provision of Sec. 57 Cr.P.C. in connection with F.I.R. No. 10/2024.

(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the State urged that Judicial Magistrate passed impugned Order granting conditional release of accused-respondents in a serious matter, on erroneous notion of provisions of law; learned Magistrate erroneously presumed arrest of accused-respondents w.e.f. 2/4/2024 whereas indeed arrest was made by SOG on 3/4/2024 in between 3.20 PM 5.42 PM and accused-respondents were produced before the Judicial Magistrate on next succeeding date on 4/4/2024 i.e. within a period of 24 hours in compliance of the mandate of Sec. 57 Cr.PC; secondly, even if detention of accused-respondents is held as illegal with SOG beyond 24 hours, when accused were produced before the Magistrate on 4/4/2024, the Judicial Magistrate allowed prayer of remand of SOG for a period of 4 days, hence thereafter custody of accused-respondents with SOG can not be held to be illegal. Therefore, in such circumstances, the impugned order is not liable to be sustained and warrants interference by this Court to prevent abuse of process of law. In support of his contentions, reliance has been placed on the following judgments:--