ORISSA HIGH COURT: ACCUSED HELD BEYOND 24 HOURS WITHOUT MAGISTRATE’S ORDER ENTITLED TO BAIL:

The Orissa High Court has ruled that accused persons detained in custody for more than 24 hours without the authority of a Magistrate are entitled to the discretionary relief of bail. The Court reached this conclusion while deciding a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The petitioners sought release in connection with a criminal case registered under Sections 140(3), 140(2), 115(2), 303(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The matter was heard by a Single Bench of Justice G. Satapathy. Senior Advocate R.P. Kar appeared for the petitioners, while Additional Public Prosecutor T.K. Acharya represented the State.

According to the prosecution, the victim-informant was allegedly abducted in connection with the repayment of Rs 2 lakh. This amount had earlier been received by the informant as an advance for arranging a piece of land for the first petitioner. The accused were further alleged to have assaulted the informant and taken away his gold chain along with a sum of Rs 2,000 transferred through PhonePe.

The petitioners primarily relied on the non-compliance of Section 58 of the BNSS, read with Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India, to seek bail.

In its reasoning, the Court emphasised the constitutional protection under Article 22(2), which mandates that no person shall be detained in custody beyond a period of 24 hours without the authority of a Magistrate. On examining the case records, the Bench noted that the accused petitioners were apprehended on 28 March 2026. However, they were produced before the Court only after 4.40 p.m. on 30 March 2026. This timeline was confirmed by the copy of the command certificate annexed to the affidavit filed by the Inspector-in-Charge of Sadar Police Station, Cuttack.

The Court observed that the petitioners had been produced after 4.40 p.m. on 30 March 2026 following their arrest on 28 March 2026. After excluding approximately 10 hours required for the journey from the place of arrest to the Court at Cuttack, a distance of roughly 260 kilometres, the time taken by the investigating agency still exceeded 40 hours. This delay clearly placed the detention beyond the constitutional limit of 24 hours without any Magistrate’s authorisation.

In light of these facts, the Court held that the arrest of the petitioners and their subsequent remand stood vitiated. The failure to produce them before a Magistrate within the prescribed constitutional time limit, excluding the necessary journey period, rendered their continued custody illegal. Consequently, the Bench concluded that the accused petitioners were entitled to the discretionary relief of bail on account of this non-compliance with Section 58 of the BNSS read with Article 22(2) of the Constitution.

The Court therefore allowed the bail applications and directed that each of the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing personal bonds of Rs 20,000 each, together with one solvent surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the concerned court.

This decision underscores the strict adherence required to the constitutional and statutory safeguards governing the production of arrested persons before a Magistrate and reaffirms that any violation of the 24-hour rule can form a valid ground for the grant of bail.