What is Remand?
Before understanding Transit Remand, it's essential to grasp the concept of remand itself. Article 22(2) of the Indian Constitution and Section 58 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) mandate that a person arrested without a warrant must be produced before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours. The special order for detention beyond 24 hours, referred to as remand, is crucial for further investigation during both pre-cognizance (Section 187 BNSS) and post-cognizance (Section 346 BNSS) stages.
The term "Transit Remand" is not explicitly defined in the BNSS but has evolved through common usage. In simple terms, it refers to the remand sought by the police to transfer the accused from one place to another in their custody. This is typically done to produce the accused before the jurisdictional magistrate who has authority over the case.
Requirements for Granting Transit Remand:
Section 187(4) of BNSS mandates the personal appearance of the accused before the magistrate while seeking police custody remand, a principle applicable to transit remand. The arrested person must be physically present or can be presented through the medium of electronic video linkage.
Additionally, Section 187(1) requires forwarding the case diary to the judicial magistrate, and Section 187(7) necessitates the magistrate recording reasons for granting police custody remand.
Watch JudiX’s 1 minute video lecture on Default bail under Section 187 of BNSS
Legal Obligations and Discretion:
While transit remand is a common practice, it raises questions about whether the police have a legal obligation to seek it or if it falls within their discretion. While, the procedure of obtaining transit remand is not mandatory, the police must follow due process, including producing the accused before the magistrate for remand.
Case laws under CRPC on the concept of transit remand:
Gautam Navlakha vs. State of Delhi:
In this case, the petitioner was arrested in New Delhi by the Maharashtra Police for an alleged offence committed in Pune. The court, considering a writ of Habeas Corpus, set aside the transit remand granted by the court of C.M.M Saket, New Delhi. The judgment stressed that a Magistrate granting transit remand must ensure material in the case diary justifies the request.
The court also noted that while strict compliance is essential, rare instances may warrant deviation, provided the Magistrate is satisfied with the explanation for non-compliance.
R.K. Nabachandra Singh vs. Manipur Administration:
This case clarifies the time-sensitive nature of producing the accused before the magistrate. It emphasizes that unless a police officer believes the investigation can be completed within 24 hours, the accused must be presented immediately. The judgment highlights that magistrates should insist on strict compliance with Section 167 CRPC, essence of which is now under Section 187 of BNSS and, if necessary, release the arrested person without delay.
The court also dispels the misconception that remand is a routine matter, affirming that magistrates should scrutinize adherence to Section 167, and non-compliance may warrant the immediate release of the arrested person.
Iqbal Kaur Kwatra vs. The Director General Of Police:
In a Writ of Habeas Corpus, this case addressed the actions of police officers who arrested an individual in Hyderabad, then sought transit remand in Maharashtra before proceeding to Jaipur. The court criticized the delay in producing the accused before a magistrate in Hyderabad, emphasizing the denial of the right to liberty. It ruled that when the police officer anticipates an investigation beyond 24 hours, the accused must be promptly presented before the magistrate.
This case laid down the obligation of police officers to prioritize presenting the accused before the nearest magistrate without waiting for the full 24 hours.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on Transit Remand and Related Concepts
1. What is the purpose of remand in the legal context?
Remand, as per Article 22(2) of the Indian Constitution and Section 58 of BNSS, refers to the special permission for detaining an individual beyond 24 hours without a warrant. It is crucial for further investigation during both pre-cognizance and post-cognizance stages.
2. How is Transit Remand defined, and where does it find its roots in the legal system?
Transit Remand, though not explicitly defined in BNSS, has evolved through common usage. In essence, it allows the police to transfer the accused from one place to another in their custody, facilitating their presentation before the jurisdictional magistrate for investigation and trial.
3. What are the requirements for granting Transit Remand under BNSS?
To grant Transit Remand, Section 187(4) of BNSS mandates the personal appearance of the accused before the magistrate. The case diary must be forwarded to the judicial magistrate (Section 187(1)), and the magistrate must record reasons for granting police custody remand (Section 187(7)).
4. Is there a legal obligation for the police to seek Transit Remand, or is it discretionary?
While Transit Remand is a common practice, Section 187 BNSS places checks on police powers. The police must adhere to due process, including producing the accused before the magistrate for remand. It is a legal obligation to ensure the accused's rights are safeguarded.
5. Can the police seek Transit Remand through electronic means?
Yes, according to Section 187(4) BNSS, the accused can be presented before the magistrate through the medium of electronic video linkage.
6. How do case laws such as Gautam Navlakha vs. State of Delhi contribute to the understanding of Transit Remand?
Gautam Navlakha's case highlights the importance of complying with Section 167 BNSS and ensuring that material in the case diary justifies the request for Transit Remand. It emphasizes strict adherence to constitutional and statutory requirements.
7. What does R.K. Nabachandra Singh vs. Manipur Administration emphasize regarding time-sensitive production of the accused before the magistrate?
This case underscores that unless the police officer believes the investigation can be completed within 24 hours, the accused must be promptly presented before the magistrate. It emphasizes the magistrate's duty to insist on strict compliance with Section 167 BNSS.
8. In Iqbal Kaur Kwatra vs. The Director General Of Police, what critique did the court have regarding the actions of the police?
The court criticized the delay in producing the accused before a magistrate, emphasizing the denial of the right to liberty. It ruled that when the police anticipate an investigation beyond 24 hours, the accused must be promptly presented before the magistrate, without waiting for the full 24 hours.
9. Can the exclusion of travel time, as mentioned in Article 22(2) and Section 57 of BNSS, be claimed by the police when seeking Transit Remand?
The consensus is that the exclusion of travel time is for the purpose of presenting the accused before the nearest magistrate and not for taking the accused before the jurisdictional magistrate in a different district, as implicit in Article 22(2) and Section 57 BNSS.
Transit remand under BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita)
Commentaires