Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.58 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 20 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 29 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Rakesh Kumar Paul vs State Of Assam on 16 August, 2017
42. Thus, in the considered view of this Court, there is merit in
the argument advanced on behalf of the State that when an
accused is released or his arrest is declared illegal solely on
technical or procedural grounds - such as in the cases
of Rakesh Kumar Paul v. State of Assam (supra), Kavita
Manikikar v. CBI (supra), or Vicky Bharat Kalyani v. State of
Maharashtra (supra) - the State cannot be precluded from
taking steps to re-arrest such a person, provided the
subsequent arrest is affected strictly in accordance with the
procedure established by law. The mere fact that the earlier
arrest was vitiated on account of procedural lapses does not,
by itself, create any blanket immunity from future arrest,
especially where the investigating agency continues to be in
possession of material implicating the accused and there has
been no adjudication on the merits of such material by the
court declaring the arrest illegal.
Section 50 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Bharat Kalyani Bhanushali vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 March, 2018
42. Thus, in the considered view of this Court, there is merit in
the argument advanced on behalf of the State that when an
accused is released or his arrest is declared illegal solely on
technical or procedural grounds - such as in the cases
of Rakesh Kumar Paul v. State of Assam (supra), Kavita
Manikikar v. CBI (supra), or Vicky Bharat Kalyani v. State of
Maharashtra (supra) - the State cannot be precluded from
taking steps to re-arrest such a person, provided the
subsequent arrest is affected strictly in accordance with the
procedure established by law. The mere fact that the earlier
arrest was vitiated on account of procedural lapses does not,
by itself, create any blanket immunity from future arrest,
especially where the investigating agency continues to be in
possession of material implicating the accused and there has
been no adjudication on the merits of such material by the
court declaring the arrest illegal.