VISHAL MANOHAR MANDREKAR Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner - accused No.44 under Secs. 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') to set aside the order of remand dtd. 2/2/2024 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 Secs. 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.1,000.00 per pill and were selling them at Hyderabad @ Rs.3,000.00 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.60,000.00 and came to Hyderabad and handed over to Rajesh. On 16/2/2024, 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 Sec. 8(c) read with 22(c), 27 and 29 of NDPS Act.

(3.) Aggrieved by the said order in remanding the petitioner-A44, this Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner-A44 contending that as per the record, the petitioner was arrested on 01.02.2024 at 01:00 P.M., at Goa. The Investigating Agency had not obtained any transit warrant from the nearest Magistrate at the place of arrest before bringing him to the jurisdictional court in Hyderabad, which was against the spirit of Section 167 of Cr.P.C. and various judicial decisions. The notice of arrest of the petitioner-accused under Sec. 50-A of Cr.P.C. was given by the Investigating Agency to the brother of the petitioner. However, the said notice was signed by the Inspector of police, who was not even present at the place of arrest. As such, the arrest of the petitioner was vitiated since beginning. The petitioner was produced before the learned Magistrate at