Police Must Electronically Inform Jurisdictional Court Of Date, Time & Place Of Out-Of-State Arrest Without Warrant: Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court has held that whenever a person is arrested without warrant outside the State, the arresting officer must immediately inform the jurisdictional court of the date, time and place of arrest through electronic means, including e-mail. [2026 LiveLaw (Ori) 61]Issuing a slew of guidelines to ensure fairness in arrests made outside the jurisdiction of the court,...
The Orissa High Court has held that whenever a person is arrested without warrant outside the State, the arresting officer must immediately inform the jurisdictional court of the date, time and place of arrest through electronic means, including e-mail. [2026 LiveLaw (Ori) 61]
Issuing a slew of guidelines to ensure fairness in arrests made outside the jurisdiction of the court, Justice Gourishankar Satapathy directed that such information be reflected in the court record upon receipt so that compliance with the mandatory safeguards governing arrest and detention can subsequently be verified.
The directions were issued while granting bail to a man after finding that his arrest and detention violated the constitutional mandate under Article 22(2) and Section 58 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), inasmuch as he was produced before the Magistrate beyond the 24 hours outer-limit.
The Court held–
“It is, therefore, mandatory for the Arresting Officer to take such arrestee immediate after the arrest, but not later than 24 hours to produce before a Magistrate exclusive the time required for the journey, but such Magistrate need not to be the jurisdictional Magistrate, however, the arrestee must be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate within 24 hours exclusive of journey by taking authorization of the nearest Magistrate. The aforesaid compliance is mandatory in nature.”
The petitioner was arrested by the Raighar Police (in the district of Nabarangpur) in connection with an FIR under Sections 370 (trafficking of person)/370(3) (trafficking of multiple persons)/376-D (gang rape)/294 (obscene acts)/323 (voluntarily causing hurt)/506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC for allegedly trafficking persons to illegally employ them in brick kilns with no reasonable wages and also for sexually assaulting the trafficked women.
Upon his arrest, the petitioner moved the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Umerkote for bail, which was rejected. Thus, he filed this bail petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) before the High Court. It was mainly contended that though he was arrested at 04:00 PM on 16.03.2024, he was produced before the Magistrate only at 10:00 AM on 19.03.2024, which according to him exceeded the constitutional and statutory stipulation of production within 24 hours excluding the time of journey.
The Court sought clarification from the IIC of Raighar Police Station as to the timelines and procedures adopted in arresting and producing the accused before the Magistrate. The IIC, by filing affidavit, informed the Court that the petitioner was apprehended at 04:00 PM on 16.03.2024 from Chittoor district in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The police then interrogated the petitioner, who confessed his guilt. However, while carrying out the arrests, the relatives and associates started opposing the police team. Upon getting no cooperation from the local police, the team left the spot with the apprehended petitioner for safety and security reasons.
As per the further deposition of the police, the investigating officer started his return journey from Andhra Pradesh at 09:00 PM on 16.03.2024 and reached at Raighar Police Station on 18.03.2024 at 07:00 AM. The IIC further conveyed that he formally arrested the petitioner only at 02:00 PM on 18.03.2024 and produced him before the Magistrate at 10:00 AM on 19.03.2024.
From the aforesaid instruction, it became apparent that though the petitioner was arrested at 04:00 PM on 16.03.2024 from Andhra Pradesh, he was not produced before the nearest Magistrate as per Section 58, BNSS.
Notwithstanding, the time of formal arrest, i.e. 02:00 PM on 18.03.2024, shown by the police, the Court held that for the purpose of Section 58, BNSS, which says that a person arrested without warrant shall not be detained for more than 24 hours without being produced before the nearest Magistrate, the arrest commences from the very moment the personal liberty of the accused is curtailed and he is confined to the custody of police. Therefore, the Court held that the 24 hours period started from the initial apprehension at 04:00 PM on 16.03.2024.
Accordingly, the period of detention of the petitioner from 04:00 PM on 16.03.2024 to 10:00 on 19.03.2024, excluding the time taken for journey, was calculated to be 32 hours, which is clearly beyond the permissible limit of 24 hours. The Court expressed shock as to why the petitioner was not taken before the nearest Magistrate and was kept in continued custody for more than 24 hours only for producing him before the jurisdictional Magistrate. Hence, it observed–
“Besides, the sentence “every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest Magistrate within 24 hours” as contemplated under Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India is not only mandatory in nature, but also it does not distinguish arrest with or without warrant and the very use of word “nearest Magistrate” makes it obligatory for the Arresting Officer to produce the arrestee before a Magistrate within 24 hours exclusive of time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Court of Magistrate and at the same time, it does not mean such nearest Magistrate to be the Magistrate having jurisdiction over the case of the arrestee.”
Resultantly, the detention of the petitioner by the police was held to be illegal, infringing his rights under Article 22(2) of the Constitution and Section 58 of the BNSS. As a corollary, keeping in view the procedural irregularity, the Court admitted the petitioner to bail.
Going beyond the given case, in order avoid any such procedural infractions in the future and to ensure compliance of mandatory provisions under Article 22(2) of the Constitution read with Sections 57, 58, 78, 82 and 187 of the BNSS, the Court deemed it proper to issue the following guidelines.
- Whenever a person is arrested without warrant outside the State or outside the jurisdiction of the Court in a case for commission of cognizable offence(s), and unless the jurisdictional Court is within 30 kilometres of the place of arrest and he cannot ordinarily be produced before the jurisdictional Court within 24 hours from the place of arrest, he shall without unnecessarily delay be taken and produced before the nearest Judicial Magistrate to satisfy the compliance of constitutional and statutory right of the accused as provided under Article 22 of the Constitution of India and Sec. 36/47/48 of the BNSS corresponding to Sec.41B/50/50A of CrPC.
- The Arresting Officer after satisfying the Magistrate about the formality as stated in preceding paragraph shall be required to obtain a transit remand for removing the arrestee immediately to jurisdictional Court.
- The officer making arrest shall follow all the guidelines of arrest and detention of accused in custody and may provide the information/notify the local police about the arrest of the accused.
- The officer arresting the accused without warrant outside the State shall immediately inform the date, time and place of arrest through electronic mode such as e-mail and otherwise to the jurisdictional Court who upon receipt of such information shall reflect such information in the record and there upon the jurisdictional Court shall later on satisfy itself for compliance of the mandatory and statutory provision of arrest and detention when the accused is produced before it.
- The Arresting Officer effecting arrest outside jurisdiction of the Court without warrant may take the assistance of the local police, but he shall inform and request the local police to make entry in the concerned book the date, time and arrest of the arrestee who was arrested without warrant.
- The Arresting Officer on arrest of the arrestee as per (i) of this guidelines shall forthwith give the information regarding such arrest and the place where the arrested person is being held to the designated Police Officer in the district and to such officer of another district where the accused person normally resides.
A copy of the order was sent to the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, Odisha, the Director General of Police (DGP), Odisha, all the criminal Courts of the State, Director of Odisha Judicial Academy (OJA) and Member Secretary of the Odisha State Legal Services Authority (OSLSA) for compliance.
Case Title: Vepanjeri Dileep Kumar v. State of Odisha
Case No: BLAPL No. 8402 of 2025
Date of Judgment: May 11, 2026
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Manas Kumar Chand, Advocate
Counsel for the State: Mr. P. Satapathy, Additional Public Prosecutor
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ori) 61