HC terms Pune man’s arrest illegal over 48-hour delay in court production

The Bombay HC deemed the arrest of Pune resident Hanumant Nazirkar illegal for not being presented to a magistrate within 24 hours, violating constitutional rights.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court (HC) has declared the arrest of a 58-year-old Pune resident illegal after finding that he was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours of being apprehended — a violation of both constitutional and statutory safeguards.

HC terms Pune man’s arrest illegal over 48-hour delay in court production

A division bench of justice Mahesh Sonak and justice Valmiki Menezes ruled on Friday that Hanumant Nazirkar’s arrest, though formally recorded much later, effectively began at 1pm on October 25, 2024, when Baramati police picked him up from Pune’s Shivajinagar metro station.

Nazirkar and his wife had been booked by the Baramati Taluka police in connection with a March 3, 2023 complaint accusing them and others of cheating the complainant of ₹3.37 crore. His plea for anticipatory bail had been earlier rejected.

While police formally recorded his arrest only at 9pm on October 26, he was produced before a magistrate around 12.20pm on October 27 — nearly 48 hours after being apprehended. Nazirkar moved the high court challenging the legality of this delay, citing Article 22 of the Constitution and Section 57 of the Criminal Procedure Code, both of which require a person taken into custody to be presented before a magistrate within 24 hours.

The government’s counsel argued that Nazirkar was not under arrest during this period, claiming he was being medically evaluated — first referred from Baramati to Sassoon Hospital in Pune, but ultimately admitted to a private hospital in Baramati shortly after midnight and discharged only on the evening of October 27. They pointed out that Nazirkar’s son was with him and that he had remained in touch with his family over the phone.

The court, however, rejected this line of defence. “The arrest commences with the restraint placed on the liberty of the person and not with the time of arrest recorded by the arresting officer,” the bench said. “The test is whether a person has been deprived of their liberty to go where they please.”

The judges observed that once Nazirkar was apprehended by police, his liberty was curtailed — making it an arrest in the eyes of the law. They held that relying on the ‘pre-arrest medical examination’ argument to bypass the 24-hour rule would defeat the purpose of constitutional protection and could encourage abuse of power.

“There is no legal provision that allows exclusion of time for medical examinations prior to arrest. Such police conduct could lead to unscrupulous tendencies,” the court noted, terming the arrest illegal.

Nazirkar was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹1 lakh and one or more sureties in the same amount.