1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.09.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12345 of 2011 R.M.Madhavan, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Anti Land Grabbing Special Cell, 1/C City Crime Branch, Trichy City. ... Petitioner Vs K.N.Ramajeyam ...Respondents/Accused-1 Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in C.M.P.No.10712 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy and to set aside the order in C.M.P.No.10712 of 2011 dated 13.09.2011 and permit the petitioner/Investigation Officer to take the custody of the accused for five days for custodial interrogation. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ramachandran Addl Public Prosecutor(Crl.Side) For Respondent : Mr.N.R.Elango Senior Counsel for Mr.T.A.Omprakash O R D E R This petition is filed by the petitioner/State to call for the records in C.M.P.No.10712 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy and to set aside the order in C.M.P.No.10712 of 2011 dated 13.09.2011 and permit the petitioner/Investigation Officer to take the custody of the accused for five days for custodial interrogation. 2. Heard Mr.R.Ramachandran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the petitioner and Mr.N.R.Elango T.A.Omprakash, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the respondent/A1 was arrested on 05.09.2011 and remanded to judicial custody on 06.09.2011. The State has filed C.M.P.No.10712 of 2011 for taking police custody of the respondent and that application was dismissed on 13.09.2011. He further submitted that the case has been registered under Sections 147, 447, 363, 342, 325, 387, 506(ii), 392 r/w 120(b) IPC and subsequently altered into Sections 147, 447, 365 ,342, 325, 387, 506(ii), 395, 307, 420 r/w 120(b) IPC on 28.08.2011 and since there is an offence under Section 120(b) I.P.C., https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 for custodial interrogation is necessary, but the trial Court has not considered this aspect and dismissed the same and hence, the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy has to be set aside and the petitioner may be permitted to take the police custody of the respondent/A1 herein. 4. Refuting the same, the learned Counsel for the respondent/A1 would submit that the respondent/A1 was arrested on 05.09.2011 and he was remanded to judicial custody on 06.09.2011. Admittedly, the police custody application was filed on 12.09.2011 and that has been dismissed on 13.09.2011. He further submitted that the period of judicial custody was expired on 20.09.2011 and hence, the matter has become infructuous and hence, he prays for dismissal. To substantiate his arguments, he relied upon the decisions of the Apex Court reported in 1992(3) SCC 141 (Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi Vs. Anupam J.Kulkarni) and 2010(3) SCC (Cri.)223 (Devender Kumar and another Vs. State of Haryana and others). 5. Considering the rival submissions made on both sides, this Court has to decide as to whether the police custody should be granted after expiry of the initial period of 15 days from the date of remand. 6. It is appropriate to consider the decision of the Apex Court, which is relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondent, reported in 1992(3) SCC 141 (Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi Vs. Anupam J.Kulkarni), wherein the Supreme Court has held as follows: "13. ...After the expiry of the first period of 15 days the further remand during the period of investigation can only be in judicial custody. There cannot be any detention in the police custody after the expiry of first fifteen days even in a case where some more offences either serious or otherwise committed by him in the same transaction come to light at a later stage. But this bar does not apply if the same arrested accused is involved in a different case arising out of a different transaction. Even if he is in judicial custody in connected with the investigation of the earlier case he can formally be arrested regarding his involvement in the different case and associate him with the investigation of that other case and the Magistrate can act as provided under Section 167(2) and the proviso and can remand him to such custody as mentioned therein during the first period of fifteen days and thereafter in accordance with the proviso as discussed above. If the investigation is not completed within the period of ninety days or sixty days then the accused has to be released on bail as https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 provided under the proviso to Section 167(2). The period of ninety days or sixty days has to be computed from the date of detention as per the orders of the Magistrate and not from the date of arrest by the Police. Consequently the first period of fifteen days mentioned in Section 167 (2) has to be computed from the date of such detention and after the expiry of the period of fifteen days it should be only judicial custody." The said decision has been followed in 2010(3) SCC (Cri.)223 (Devender Kumar and another Vs. State of Haryana and others). 7. Considering the judgments of the Apex Court along with the facts of this case, that the respondent/A1 was arrested on 05.09.2011 and he was remanded to judicial custody on the same day and the period of first 15 days of custody has been expired on 20.09.2011 and he was directed to produce before the Court on 20.09.2011, I am of the view that this application has become infructuous since the 15 days time has been expired on 20.09.2011. Since the petition itself has become infructuous, there is no need to analyse the order of the Trial Court and even though the petition itself was filed in time as per the dictum laid down by the Apex Court, there cannot be any detention by way of police custody after the expiry of first 15 days. Hence, the Criminal original petition is dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(A.S.) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy 2. TheAssistant Commissioner of Police, Anti Land Grabbing Special Cell, 1/C City Crime Branch, Trichy City. 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1CC To.Mr.T.A.Omprakash, Advocate, Sr.No.32867 Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12345 of 2011 22.09.2011 RR SMA/12.10.2011/5C/3P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/