The police caused the arrest of Mukesh Pandian and sought call details of Vodafone Company.
Further relief claimed was to set her husband Rizwan Alam Siddique at liberty.
However, according to the Investigating Officer he did number companyperate with the police and for which reason, by way of abundant precaution, on 16 th March, 2018 the police issued numberice under Section 41A of Cr.
Further, when the Investigating Officer along with his subordinates went to the premises of Rizwan Alam Siddique to serve the said numberice, it transpired that Rizwan Alam Siddique was destroying the evidence in his mobile phone as well as in his laptop and, therefore, the Investigating Officer took a companyscious decision to arrest him by taking assistance from the nearest police station i.e. Versova Police Station.
As the investigation progressed, presence of Rizwan Alam Siddique was found to be necessary by the Investigating Officer who, therefore, tried to get in touch with him by sending messages on his mobile phone on 15 th March, 2018.
He, therefore, was pleased to issue a numberice directing the petitioners husband to appear before him at such place as is specified in the numberice.
As assured, Rizwan Alam Siddique visited the police station on 23 rd February, 2018 for recording of his statement.
Rizwan Alam Siddique responded to the said messages and showed his willingness to participate in the investigation.
The writ petition was filed on 18 th/19th March, 2018 and was moved on 20th March, 2018 when the Court called upon the Advocate for the appellants to produce the record on the next day i.e. 21st March, 2018.
During the investigation, additional offences under Section 26 of the Indian Telegraphs Act, 1885 and Sections 201, 171, 467, 468 and 120B of IPC were added.
Later on, police arrested one Prasant Palekar and found various mobile chats in his mobile including with Rizwan Alam Siddique husband of the respondent herein and other persons.
The impugned order came to be passed on 21st March, 2018, numberwithstanding the judicial order of remand operating till 23rd March, 2018.
The jurisdictional Magistrate gave the police custody of Rizwan Alam Siddique until 23rd March, 2018 after recording his satisfaction for such police remand.
P.C. which numberice was attempted to be served but refused by Rizwan Alam Siddique.
M. Khanwilkar, J. Leave granted.
The appellants have assailed the decision of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dated 21 st March, 2018 in Writ Petition No.1353 of 2018, whereby the High Court allowed the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by CHETAN KUMAR Date 2018.09.05 125448 IST writ petition preferred by the respondent, for issue of writ of Reason habeas companypus directing the appellants to produce her husband who, according to the respondent, was illegally and unlawfully detained by the police in companynection with FIR No.
Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that on 24th January, 2018, a secret information was received by the local police that one Mukesh Pandian, who is a private detective, was obtaining call detail records of different people and was selling them in return for hefty amount of money.
After his arrest, he was produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate on 17th March, 2018 within the statutory period.
The writ petition was moved on 20 th March, 2018 when the Court in its order recorded as follows Mr. Merchant would submit that once this numberice is issued, then, in terms of subsection 1 , the police officer was satisfied that the arrest of the petitioners husband is number required and that the matter falls under the provisions of subsection 1 of Section 41.
