CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has granted bail to an accused in an alleged rape case after holding that his arrest and detention violated the mandatory constitutional safeguard requiring production before a magistrate within 24 hours.
The bail was granted by Justice Gourishankar Satapathy on Monday along with a set of mandatory guidelines to the state administration aimed at streamlining procedures relating to arrests made outside a court’s territorial jurisdiction.
The case arose out of an FIR registered at Raighar police station on March 14, 2024, concerning allegations relating to the plight of labourers from Nabarangpur district who had reportedly been supplied to brick kilns in Andhra Pradesh. During investigation, police recorded the statement of a 25-year-old victim, who alleged that the accused had raped her, recorded the act on video and threatened to circulate the footage on social media if she disclosed the incident.
According to an affidavit filed by the IIC of Raighar police station, the police team left Odisha on the night of March 14 and reached Vedarukupam in Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh on March 16.
The accused was apprehended at about 4 pm on March 16 and the police team left Andhra Pradesh at 9 pm the same day, reaching Raighar police station at 7 am on March 18. Though the accused was formally shown arrested at 2 pm on March 18, he was produced before the jurisdictional court only at 10 am on March 19.
Justice Satapathy observed that the “apprehension of the petitioner at 4 pm on 16.03.2024 is the time to be reckoned” for the purpose of Section 58 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Article 22(2) of the Constitution. The court held that excluding travel time, the accused remained in custody for 32 hours before being produced before the court, exceeding the legally permissible 24-hour limit.
The court further noted that the accused was neither produced before the nearest magistrate in Andhra Pradesh nor taken to the local police station for necessary diary entries regarding the arrest. Calling the failure a violation of the accused’s fundamental right, Justice Satapathy said the inevitable conclusion was the grant of bail.
The accused was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of `50,000 with two solvent sureties. The court also directed the Home department, DGP and all criminal courts in the state to ensure compliance with constitutional safeguards relating to arrest and detention under Article 22(2) of the Constitution and provisions of the BNSS.
