Police Must Secure Transit Remand For Arrests Outside State To Safeguard Rights Under Article 22 : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently held that the police have to obtain a transit remand when arresting an individual outside the jurisdiction where the offence is registered. This mandate is in line with the requirements of Article 22 of the Constitution, emphasizing the need for police to facilitate the accused's transfer from the location of arrest to the jurisdiction where the crime is registered.

"Prior to effecting the arrest outside a particular jurisdiction, the police is obligated to secure the transit remand i.e. the remand of the accused, for taking him from one place to another in their own custody, usually for the purpose of producing him before the concerned magistrate who has jurisdiction to try/commit the case. The primary purpose of such a remand is to enable the police to shift the person in custody from the place of arrest to the place where the matter can be investigated and tried," the Court stated.

The Court observed, “Immediately upon affecting the arrest of a person outside the jurisdiction where the offense is registered, the police is obligated to secure a transit remand. The police is obligated to secure a transit remand of the accused for taking him from the place where he is arrested to the place where the crime is registered, for production before the competent magistrate in terms of the requirement of Article 22.”

The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing an SLP against the judgment of Sessions Judge, Bangalore which had allowed the extraterritorial bail petition by the accused husband. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had approached the Apex Court in an SLP.

Understanding 'Transit Remand Order'

In practical terms, a 'transit remand order' refers to a judicial magistrate's order remanding an arrested person to police custody for their transit to another state. Imagine you're arrested in one state, but the police need to take you to another state where an FIR is registered against you for further investigation. That's where 'transit remand' steps in. It's like getting a permission slip from a judicial magistrate, allowing the police to move you to another state while keeping you in their custody.

It is pertinent to note that in 2018, the Delhi High Court bench led by Justices Dr. S Muralidhar and Vinod Goel, quashed a transit remand order due to non-compliance with Section 167, in the case Gautam Navlakha vs Union of India. The High Court had also laid down guidelines for police acting across inter-state borders as recommended by Justice SP Garg Committee.

Roots in Legal Framework: Section 167 of CrPC

The term 'transit remand order' isn't explicitly defined in Indian criminal law, but it can be traced to Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Article 22 of the Constitution. This section outlines what happens when investigations can't be wrapped up within the initial 24 hours.

The Court explained “The arrested person has to be produced before the nearest magistrate. If such a magistrate finds that he has no jurisdiction to try the case in which the accused has been arrested, he may order the accused to be forwarded to a magistrate having the jurisdiction to try the case or to commit it for trial. The primary purpose of such a transit remand is to enable the police to shift the person in custody from the place of arrest to the place where the matter can be investigated.”

Also from the judgment -

High Courts, Session Courts Can Grant Interim/Transit Anticipatory Bail Even When FIR Is Registered In Another State: Supreme Court

Conditions For Transit Anticipatory Bail In FIRs Registered In Other States : Supreme Court Explains