RAHUL PAREEK Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these writ petitions of habeas corpus, a prayer is made for release of the petitioner-Rahul Pareek alleging his detention and custody to be illegal.

(2.) Learned counsel submits that these writ petitions are involving various questions of law and also focus working of the police and the courts act in derogation to the provisions of law.

(3.) An FIR No.50/2016 was registered on 17.3.2016 with Police Station - Anti Corruption Bureau, Jaipur (for short 'the ACB') for offence under sections 7, 13(1)(D), 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act of 1988') read with section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC'). The petitioner was, however, arrested on 11.3.2016 and was produced before the learned Special Judge No.1, Anti Corruption Cases, Jaipur (for short 'the court below') on 12.3.2016. The court below granted two days police custody remand though no FIR was registered till passing of the order. On 14.3.2016, he was sent in judicial custody for 14 days though FIR was not registered even till then. In view of above, arrest of the accused-petitioner and also the orders for police custody so as the judicial custody were without registration of the FIR. It was per se illegal as hit by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the CrPC'). A person cannot be arrested without registration of FIR and, at the same time, no order can be passed under section 167 Crimial P.C. unless the FIR is registered. The provision aforesaid applies on registration of the FIR as the investigation can be conducted by the police thereupon only. If the investigation is not completed within 24 hours of registration of FIR, authorisation of custody can be sought under section 167 CrPC, subject to maximum period provided therein.