Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Supreme Court Allows CBI to Interrogate Accused in Police Custody Beyond 15 Days in Special Circumstances

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India held that the time limit of 15 days for police custody under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure may be extended in special circumstances. The Court stated that there cannot be a blanket rule that the police custody of an accused cannot exceed 15 days.

The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar. The case before the Court concerned an accused who had obtained interim bail during his seven-day police custody and then refused to cooperate with the investigating agency. The accused was later granted bail, which was cancelled by the trial court due to his non-cooperation with the investigation.

The Court observed that in special circumstances, where an accused frustrates the judicial process by avoiding police custody, the investigating agency may be permitted to interrogate the accused in police custody for a longer period. The Court further held that the right of custodial interrogation is an important right in favour of the investigating agency to unearth the truth, which cannot be frustrated by an accused.

The Court also stated that the view taken by the Court in Anupam J. Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra, (1992) 3 SCC 141, that there cannot be any police custody beyond 15 days from the date of arrest, requires reconsideration. The Court noted that there may be instances where a trial court erroneously refuses to grant police custody within 15 days, and the higher court reverses this decision after 15 days have passed.

The Court allowed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to have police custody of the accused for four days, taking into account that the CBI was unable to interrogate the accused during his previous police custody due to his hospitalization and subsequent interim bail. The Court noted that the accused had successfully avoided the full operation of the order of police custody granted by the trial court, and cannot be permitted to play with the investigation or frustrate the judicial process.

Central Bureau of Investigation vs Vikas Mishra @ Vikash Mishra

Latest Legal News