Prayagraj : While applying the US doctrine of ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ in the context of constitutional protections under Articles 21 (right to life and personal liberty) and 22 (safeguards against arrest and detention), the Allahabad High Court has held that a subsequent formal arrest and remand cannot legitimise an earlier illegal detention.
A division bench comprising Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev made the observation on Sept 28 while allowing a habeas corpus petition filed by Prayagraj resident Ravi Chaurasiya, who alleged illegal detention by the police. The high court held that where the initial detention of a person is unlawful, a subsequent arrest, even if supported by valid grounds, and the remand proceedings flowing from it would also stand vitiated. The court found that the police formally arrested Chaurasiya only after his mother approached the high court with a habeas corpus writ petition. His mother visited the police station the following day to ascertain his whereabouts before moving the high court. However, it found that the counter-affidavit filed by the station house officer and investigating officer admitted the petitioner’s custody. The SHO attributed the failure to record the petitioner’s presence in the general diary to an inadvertent mistake. However, the court rejected this explanation. the court directed his forthwith release, if not wanted in any other case While clarifying that the police may re-arrest the petitioner in accordance with law and the safeguards laid down by Supreme Court.
The high court had earlier called for CCTV footage from the police station.
The court also found non-compliance with Section 38 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) in the present case. The provision concerns an accused’s rights to meet an advocate of his choice during investigation.