Summary
The Supreme Court set aside a habeas corpus order releasing a person whose police custody was authorised by an operative, unchallenged Magistrate’s remand order. It also expunged scathing remarks against police officers made without an opportunity to explain on affidavit. Since the person had already been released, further action had to proceed strictly according to law, rather than merely because the High Court’s order was set aside; guilt and the correctness of the charges remained open.
Issues
- Whether habeas corpus was available during police custody authorised by an operative and unchallenged judicial remand order.
- Whether adverse remarks against police officials and consequential further action were justified.
Held
- At both the filing and disposal of the writ petition, police custody was authorised by the jurisdictional Magistrate’s remand order. That order was not challenged. In these circumstances the detention was pursuant to judicial authority, and a writ limited to habeas corpus could not be issued. (¶ 9)
- A police officer could not voluntarily release a person in breach of an operative judicial remand order. The High Court should not have taken offence at the officer’s submission that release could follow the Court’s direction, or made adverse findings without allowing the officers to explain the factual position on affidavit. (¶ 10)
- Without a challenge to the remand order, the High Court should have refrained from entering the merits of the arrest in these proceedings. Its scathing observations against the police in paragraphs 4–6 of the impugned judgment were expunged. (¶ 11)
- The person had already been released. The investigating officer could proceed in the criminal case strictly according to law, not merely on the strength of reversal of the habeas corpus order. The Court expressed no opinion on guilt or the correctness of the charges. (¶ 12–13)
Result
State’s appeal allowed; habeas corpus order set aside and adverse remarks expunged. Further investigation or action permitted strictly according to law; no automatic rearrest directed.