9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. When is a person said to be under arrest? 2. Are the terms 'custody' and 'arrest' synonymous? 3. Are the Customs officials vested with powers under the Customs Act, 1962, to detain any person for any period and at any place for the purpose of an inquiry, interrogation or investigation? 4. Will the detention of a person by the Customs officers for the purpose of enquiry, interrogation or investigation amount to an 'arrest' of the said person? 5. Is detention of a person by the Customs officers for the purpose of inquiry or interrogation or investigation beyond 24 hours without producing him before a Magistrate, violative of Article 22 of the Constitution of India? Summary: 1. When is a person said to be under arrest? The term 'arrest' is not defined in procedural or substantive Acts, but it signifies a restraint of the person. The court explained that arrest means the apprehension or restraint or the deprivation of one's personal liberty. An arrest involves taking a person into custody under legal authority for holding or detaining him to answer a criminal charge or preventing a criminal offense. The essential elements include an intent to arrest under authority, accompanied by a seizure or detention of the person, which is understood by the person arrested. 2. Are the terms 'custody' and 'arrest' synonymous? The court held that 'custody' and 'arrest' are not synonymous. While every arrest involves custody, not every custody amounts to an arrest. The term 'custody' implies restraint and can mean safe-keeping, protection, or control, depending on the context. The court cited various legal definitions and interpretations to conclude that custody does not necessarily equate to arrest. 3. Are the Customs officials vested with powers under the Customs Act, 1962, to detain any person for any period and at any place for the purpose of an inquiry, interrogation or investigation? Customs officials have the authority to require or summon any person for inquiry under Sections 107 and 108 of the Customs Act, but this does not amount to an arrest. The court clarified that Customs officers are not police officers and their powers are for checking smuggling and safeguarding revenue, not for investigating crimes. Therefore, the detention for inquiry, interrogation, or investigation by Customs officials does not equate to an arrest. 4. Will the detention of a person by the Customs officers for the purpose of enquiry, interrogation or investigation amount to an 'arrest' of the said person? The court ruled that detention by Customs officers for inquiry, interrogation, or investigation does not amount to an arrest. The court emphasized that the terms 'arrest' and 'custody' are not synonymous and that the mere taking of a person into custody by an authority empowered to arrest does not necessarily constitute an arrest. 5. Is detention of a person by the Customs officers for the purpose of inquiry or interrogation or investigation beyond 24 hours without producing him before a Magistrate, violative of Article 22 of the Constitution of India? The court held that the requirement to produce a person before a Magistrate within 24 hours as per Article 22(2) of the Constitution applies only if the person is arrested and detained in custody. During an inquiry under Sections 107 and 108 of the Customs Act, the person is not considered arrested. However, if a Customs officer detains a person for a prolonged period exceeding 24 hours without proper authority, it would be illegal and any statement obtained during such detention would be suspect. Conclusion: The Full Bench concluded that the interpretation of 'arrest' and 'custody' in the earlier Division Bench ruling in Kaisar Otmar's case was incorrect. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to the legal procedures for arrest as outlined in Section 46 of the Crl. P.C. and held that the prolonged detention by Customs officials without proper authority is illegal. The writ petitions were referred back to the Division Bench for consideration on their merits in light of this judgment.
|
