Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. Surprisingly, FIR was lodged on 15th February 2017 Patna High Court CR. WJC No.707 of 2017(16) dt.12-02-2025 vide Katihar Town P.S. Case No.108 of 2017 under Sections 419/420/406/467/468/469/470/471/120B/34 of the IPC. It is found in P.S. G.D. entry no. 544 dated 15.02.2017 recorded at 18:35 hours that the registration of the case was recorded.

8. It is the mandatory provision in the CrPC that as soon as a cognizable case is registered in a P.S., it would be produced before the learned jurisdictional magistrate without delay. This Court fails to understand as to why the formal FIR and other documents were produced before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 17th February 2017. It is not the case of the respondents that the following date, i.e., on 16 th February 2017, was a holiday; even if the said date was a holiday, it would have been produced before the learned remand magistrate. Police did not intimate the learned magistrate about the institution of the case; had it been informed on 16th February 2017, it might have been unearthed as to whether the petitioners were actually detained in custody or not. In the first counter-affidavit, the Superintendent of Police, Katihar, tried to explain the interpolation in the arrest memo as a human error. Human error may be contained in one or two places, but in all the arrest memos and other relevant places, similar human error had occurred, which explanation appears to this Court to be hard Patna High Court CR. WJC No.707 of 2017(16) dt.12-02-2025 to digest. It is absolutely clear that in the arrest memo, the word "16" was interpolated, and in that place "17" was written to show that the accused were arrested on 17th February. Had they been arrested on the 16th, it was the duty of the police authority to forward them along with a copy of the FIR, which was forwarded on 17th February 2017. However, only to forward them on 18th February 2017, there was an interpolation, and the said interpolation cannot be said to be innocuous human error. This Court is not unmindful to note that the arrest memo was prepared by a senior police officer, who, it is presumed, prepared arrest memos previously in a number of cases. Therefore, a series of manipulations with regard to the date of arrest cannot be accepted as only human error. From careful perusal of the documents on record, it is clear to the Court that in regard to Katihar Town P.S. Case No. 108 of 2017, which was registered on 15th February 2017, relevant papers were prepared for production before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 16th February 2017. The accused persons were also arrested on 16th February 2017, but they were produced on 18th February 2017. It is unfortunate to note that the endorsement made by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on the arrest memo was dated 18th February 2017. There was no answer to the question when Patna High Court CR. WJC No.707 of 2017(16) dt.12-02-2025 the accused persons were arrested as per the prosecution case on 17th February why they were not produced before the learned Magistrate along with the papers and documents of Katihar Town P.S. Case No. 108 of 2017 on 17.02.2017. Thus, I find that at least there was one day's wrongful detention of the accused persons in the police station.