Polic remand in crpc

Article 22(2) of the constitution of India provides that any

person arrested and detained in custody must be produced
before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours of his arrest
and no person can be detained beyond the period of 24 hours
without the authority of the magistrate. Similarly, section
57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) states that
the police officer who arrests a person without a warrant shall
not detain him in his custody for more than 24 hours without
the special permission of a magistrate under section 167 of
the CrPC. This special permission referred to in Section 57 is
known as remand. It can also be known as pre- trial
detention.
The word remand generally means to return or to send back
but, in the legal world, it has two different meanings. Firstly,
it means to send the accused back in the custody of the
competent authority and secondly, it means to send back the
cases from the appellate court to the lower court.
The power of a court to remand an accused to custody is
governed by a number of provisions of the CrPC, these being
Sections of these 167(2), 209(b) and 309(2). Each provisions
is independent of each other and come into play at different
stages of the criminal trial. The remand under Section 167(2)
relates to the stage of investigation and is ordered for
furthering the investigation and can be either in judicial
custody or police custody. The remand under S.209(b) relates
to the stage when the magistrate commits the case, he can
remand the accused to the custody during and until the
conclusion of the trial subject to the provisions of bail under
the code and finally remand under S.309(2) relates to a stage
after cognizance and can only be sent to judicial custody.
It has been held in the case of State rep. by Inspector of
Police and ors. v. N.M.T. Joy Immaculate[1], that the remand
under Section 209(b) and Section 309(2) of CrPC is for
securing the presence of the accused during the trial.
HOW LONG CAN A POLICE OFFICER DETAIN A PERSON
WITHOUT REMAND?
The police cannot detain any person in its custody for more
than 24 hours according to Section 57 of CrPC. It specifically
prohibits a police official from detaining the arrested person
for more than 24 hours in police custody. This period of 24
hours is exclusive of the time required for transporting the
accused from the place of arrest to the court of the
Magistrate.
It was held in the case of R.K. Naba Chandra Singh v Manipur
Administration[2] by the Hon’ble High Court that if the police
officer considers that the investigation cannot be completed
within 24 hours, then it is his duty to produce the accused
forthwith before the Magistrate.
It was held in the case of Mohd. Suleman v King
Emperor[3] that the right to be brought before a magistrate
within a period of not more than 24 hours of arrest has been
created with a view-
1. To prevent arrest and detention for the purpose of
extracting confessions or as a means of compelling people to
give information.
2. To prevent police stations being used as though they
were prisons
3. To afford an early recourse to a judicial officer
independent of the police on all questions of bail or
discharge.
Another point which must be noted is that only an officer in
charge of the police station or an investigating officer not
below the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police is empowered to
ask for remand.
It has been held in the case of Sharifbai v Abdul
Razak[4] that if the Police officer fails to produce an arrested
person before a Magistrate within 24 hours of the arrest, he
shall be held guilty of wrongful detention.
PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED WHEN INVESTIGATION
CANNOT BE COMPLETED WITHIIN 24 HOURS
Section 167 lays down the procedure that is to be followed
when investigation cannot be completed by the investigating
agency within 24 hours which has been fixed by Section 57 of
the CrPC. Whenever an accused person is arrested or
detained in custody by a police officer during investigation
and it appears that the investigation cannot be completed
within 24 hours, the accused person must be forwarded to a
Judicial Magistrate. The Magistrate to whom the accused is so
forwarded may from time to time authorize the detention of
the accused in such custody as such the Magistrate deems
fit, for a term not exceeding 15 days in whole.
It is held in the case of State of Gujarat v Swami Amar Jyoti
Shyam that there is no obligation on the part of the
Magistrate to grant remand as a matter of course. The Police
has to make out a case for that.
The proviso clause to S. 167(2) states that the Magistrate
shall have the authority to remand an accused to judicial
custody for a period not exceeding 60 days for offences that
are not punishable with death, life imprisonment or
imprisonment upto 10 years and not exceeding 90 days for
offences that are punishable with death, life imprisonment or
imprisonment exceeding 10 years and on expiry of the period
of 60 days or 90 days as the case may be, the accused
person shall be released on bail under this sub-section. . The
prime objective of Section 167 of the CrPC for further
extension of the detention period is to keep away the
accused person from the society for the protection of the
society and the accused person himself. This extension
ensures that the accused person does not evade the law and
is present for all the inquiry that is needed by the police
officers regarding their investigation.
While computing the total period of 60 or 90 days referred to
in proviso to sub section 2 of Section 167, the period of
detention under Section 57 of CrPC has to be excluded.[5]
There have been differing views with regard to the
computation of the period of 60 or 90 days, as the case may
be. While one view preferred to count the period from the
day of arrest, the other view held that it should be counted
from the day of remand by the Magistrate. The Supreme
Court of India has resolved the matter by upholding the latter
view in the case of Chanti Satyanarayana v State of A.P.[6]
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising of
Justices Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha, and KM
Joseph has held in the case of Bikramjit Singh v. State of
Punjab[7] that right to default bail is not merely a statutory
right under the first proviso to Section 167(2) of the CrPC, but
that it is part of the procedure established by law under
Article 21 of the Constitution of India Therefore, it is a
fundamental right granted to an accused person to be
released on bail once the conditions of the first proviso to
Section 167(2), CrPC are fulfilled.
Section 167 ceases to be applicable for the purposes of
extending remand, once the charge sheet has been filed or
beyond the prescribed period of 60 days or 90 days as the
case may be. Time and again, this has been upheld by the
Supreme Court of India as well as by several High Courts
across the country.
Hence, it can be understood that the purpose of Section 167
is to cast a duty on the investigating agency to complete the
investigation and file a charge sheet within the specified time
limit
This section also provides that the Magistrate should not only
direct but should also record his reason for remanding the
accused. In case he does not feel that it is necessary to order
for the detention of the accused, then also he must record his
reason for the same.
CONCLUSION
From all the discussion regarding remand by a judicial
magistrate when investigation cannot be completed within 24
hours, it can be concluded that the provision is enacted in a
manner so as to favour the accused. The intention of the
section is to protect the accused from the unscrupulous
police officer. This is done by providing the maximum
duration for which the accused can be sent to police custody.
The detention is police custody is not favoured by the law as
the section provides for the maximum period for which the
accused can be sent for remand in police custody, i.e., 15
days. Various other protections are also given in the provision
like presentation before magistrate before completion of 24
hours time period so that after considering the evidence on
record, he can decide as to whether remand should be
ordered or not. Remand is ordered only after considering
evidence and not on the face of the application. Also, a
maximum limit is set for which remand can be ordered. After
expiry of that period, the accused is entitled to bail in case
the chargesheet is not filed by the police in time.