In a recent judicial pronouncement, the Supreme Court has reinforced a crucial legal requirement, emphasizing the obligation of law enforcement agencies to secure a transit remand when effecting arrests beyond their jurisdiction. The decision aligns with the constitutional provisions outlined in Article 22, emphasizing the imperative for the police to facilitate the transfer of the accused from the arrest location to the jurisdiction where the alleged crime is officially registered.
The Court’s ruling stipulates that before making an arrest outside a particular jurisdiction, law enforcement is duty-bound to secure a transit remand. This remand, which involves taking the accused from the arrest location to the area where the crime is registered, is primarily intended to enable proper investigation and trial proceedings.
The bench, comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, made these assertions while adjudicating a Special Leave Petition challenging a Sessions Judge’s decision in Bangalore. The judge had granted extraterritorial bail to the accused husband, prompting the petitioner to seek recourse in the apex court.
Understanding the Significance of ‘Transit Remand Order’
In practical terms, a ‘transit remand order’ refers to a judicial magistrate’s directive authorizing the temporary custody transfer of an arrested individual for transit to another state. Picture this scenario: you are apprehended in one state, but law enforcement needs to transport you to another state where a First Information Report (FIR) has been filed against you for further investigation. The ‘transit remand’ essentially acts as a permission slip from a judicial magistrate, granting the police the authority to transfer you to another state while maintaining custody.
It’s crucial to note that in 2018, the Delhi High Court, led by Justices Dr. S Muralidhar and Vinod Goel, invalidated a transit remand order due to non-compliance with Section 167. In the case of Gautam Navlakha vs Union of India, the court not only quashed the order but also established guidelines for police operations across state borders, following recommendations by the Justice SP Garg Committee.
Legal Foundation: Section 167 of CrPC
Although the term ‘transit remand order’ lacks explicit definition in Indian criminal law, its roots can be traced to Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Article 22 of the Constitution. Section 167 delineates the course of action when investigations cannot be concluded within the initial 24 hours.
The Court expounded, “The arrested person must be presented before the nearest magistrate. If the magistrate determines a lack of jurisdiction, he may order the accused to be forwarded to a magistrate with jurisdiction or commit the case for trial. The primary purpose of transit remand is to enable the police to shift the person in custody from the place of arrest to the site for investigation.”
This judicial stance is part of a broader legal landscape, as evidenced by related judgments such as the Supreme Court’s assertion that High and Session Courts can grant interim/transit anticipatory bail even when the FIR is lodged in another state, as seen in the case of Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka.
