On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court ordered release of a prisoner being illegally detained by the Police as no production warrant was pending against him on the date he was granted bail.

The petitioner herein had been granted bail by Trial Court on 12th May but the Police Authorities kept him under the custody post this order and produced him before the Concerned Court in Lucknow on 18th May. 

Learned Counsel of the petitioner argued that it was illegal and unjustified on part of the authorities as there was no pending production warrant against the petitioner on the date he was granted bail. He added that petitioner’s daughter had already filed the surety bond before the Duty Magistrate on 15th May.

He contended that the petitioner is entitled to parity with coaccused who has been released on bail on 16th May.

The Court after hearing the arguements positioned that there was no live production warrant against the petitioner on the day he was granted bail. The last production warrant was dated 6th March directing the Jail authorities to produce the petitioner before a court in Lucknow on 16th March.

The Court recalled one of its order passed on 15th May in view of this case and stated:

Section 269 (c) of the Cr.P.C. prescribes that where a person in respect of whom an order is made under Section 267, requiring attendance. of a prisoner before a particular court, is in custody for a period that would expire before expiration of the time required for complying with the order and for taking him back to the prison in which he is confined or detained, in those circumstances, the officer in charge of the prison must abstain from carrying out the Court’s order and instead, should send a statement of reasons to the concerned court for the said absence.

It also cited Allahabad High Court's order in Dharampal and another Vs. State of U.P. and another in which it was decided:

Requisition under Section 3(2), Prisoners (Attendance in Courts) Act, 1955 and Section -267(1) of CrPC by itself doesn't authorise the detention of any person. It merely requires the officer in charge of the prison to produce the detenu before the requisitioning Court on the date fixed by it and after the purpose of requisition is over, to take him back and to keep him in custody in accordance with the writ or direction issued by the Court which had authorised his detention in jail. It has been laid down in Section 55, Prisons Act, 1894, that during the period the prisoner is away from the prison in pursuance of the requisition, he would throughout be deemed to be in the custody of the prison and would be subject to all the same incidents as if he were actually in prison.
 

In view of the above and considering the fact that there was no live production warrant against the petitioner presently, the Court directed the release of the prisoner.

The Court also directed the Director General (Prisons) to keep in mind Section 269(c) of Cr. P.C. as well as judgment of the Allahabad High Court.

The order has been delivered by Justice MANMOHAN and Justice SANJEEV NARULA on 19-05-2020.

Read Order Here:

Share this Document :

Picture Source :