Arrest without Magistrate Presentation Within 24 Hours Deemed Illegal
This decision in the case of emphasises Hemang Jadavji Shah v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., strengthen the application of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) and Article 22(2) of the Indian Constitution, as well as Section 58 of the newly enacted Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which replaces portions of the CrPC.
It strengthens the fundamental rights ensuring that the person detained must be presented to the Magistrate within 24 hrs, being not just a fundamental right but also the Natural justice, to ensure no arbitrary decision is encouraged.
Case Background
The petitioner, Hemang Jadavji Shah, was arrested by Mumbai Police’s Economic Offences Wing in connection with a financial fraud case. He was not submitted to the nearest magistrate within 24 hours of arrest, as required by law under article 22(2) part III of the Indian Constitution. Instead the news states that he was allegedly imprisoned for more than 48 hours without judicial oversight stating arbitrariness by the administration.
Shah challenged this act as a violation of his fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22(2), which explicitly state that no person shall be deprived of their life or personal liberty except in accordance with procedure established by law, and that the arrested individual must be brought before a magistrate within 24 hours of arrest.
Legal Framework and Analysis
The case was led by a Division Bench, which included Justices Gauri Godse and Somasekhar Sundaresan, ruled overwhelmingly in favour of the petitioner. The court determined that the State had failed to meet mandatory legal obligations under both constitutional and legislative standards. Section 58 of the BNSS, which replicates Section 76 of the old CrPC, demands that an apprehended individual be presented before the nearest magistrate without undue delay and within 24 hours.
The court emphasised the need of following procedural procedures when detaining someone based on suspicion or investigation. Any arrest made without the magistrate’s notice within 24 hours is illegal and violates the individual’s fundamental rights as it goes beyond the very concept of natural justice.
This pronouncement reaffirms the idea that procedural safeguards are more than just technical requirements; they are the essential key essence of the law ensuring no arbitrariness is there in the justice system, ensuring the justice is delivered in just and fair nature.
Implications and Significance
This verdict has far-reaching repercussions for Indian policing methods. It serves as a stark reminder to all law enforcement authorities that constitutional rights cannot be compromised in the name of effective inquiry. The decision underscores that abuses of personal liberty, especially during high-profile investigations, would not be condoned by the courts.
The decision is also significant because it applies Section 58 of the BNSS, a new procedural code that confirms that the safeguards under the old CrPC are relevant and effective within the current framework. It also emphasises the judiciary’s commitment to combating custodial abuses and arbitrary state power.
Conclusion
The Bombay High Court’s decision in Hemang Jadavji Shah v. State of Maharashtra not only confirms the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, but it also sends a strong message regarding accountability in law enforcement ensuring the fair delivery to justice. Further on by determining that any imprisonment for more than 24 hours without presenting the accused to a magistrate is unconstitutional, the court emphasises the importance of human liberty and procedural justice enshrined under article 21 of the Indian Constitution as well as the Natural Justice.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
NITYA JAIN is a first year BBA LLB student at Symbiosis Law School, Pune. She is a certified legal researcher by Manupatra. She has an interest in Public service, research, drafting. She has done various legal internships and looks forward to doing more. Her interest lies in corporate law, International law and Intellectual Property Law.