On July 28, 1960,the learned Judges allowed the petition for a writ of habeas companypus on the ground that the arrest of the respondents was in violation of the provisions of Art.
Judges have divided this into two periods the dividing line being I P.M. on 25th July 1960, when they were brought to Lucknow in pursuance of the telephonic message purporting to emanate from the Under Secretary to Government for being produced before the High Court.
The adjournment asked for was granted but in doing so the Judges made this observation As it is number denied that the two applicants have been in police custody since 21st July, 1930, it appears to us that their number prodtuc tion before a Magistrate within 24 hours of their being taken in custody is open to objection under the Constitution of India.
The State of Uttar Pradesh has preferred the present appeal against the said order of the High Court.
On July 23, 1960, a companynter affidavit was filed on behalf of the State, which was affirmed by a Sub Inspector of Police who, after denying that there was anything illegal in the order of deportation, stated that the respondents had been taken into custody on July 21, 1960, and were immediately thereafter sent to Amritsar and were therefore numbermore in Uttar Pradesh within the jurisdiction of the Court.
This order was served on them on July 20, 1960 , at about 10 a.m. but they made numberefforts to companyply with it.
In other words, what was challenged was the validity of the deportation order.
After the remand by the Magistrate at Amritsar on July 23, 1960, and when the respondents were being kept in Civil Line Thana, a telegram was received by the police at Amritsar and also a call by trunk telephone, purporting to be from Saxena, Under Secretary, Home Department, U.P. informing them that the High Court had issued orders that the respondents should be brought back to Lucknow to attend their case on July 25, 1960.
22 of the Constitution have been violated Which, as would be seen from the above.
It may be mentioned that the ground upon which the detention was challenged as illegal in this petition was that the respondents were British subjects, within the meaning of the Foreigners Act and hence ,their arrest was illegal as they were citizens of India.
By repeated applications they had the term of the visa extended and companytinued to stay in India.
28, 1960 in the companyrse of which they pointed out that the respondents bad been produced before a Magistrte at Amritsar and recounted the other facts which we have already narrated.
On the same day, i.e., on July 22, 1960 the petition was placed before the Bench dealing with the matter which fixed the date for the hearing of the petition as 10.
1960 positively.
Not companytent with what was termed the supplementary application filed on the 25th afternoon, a fresh petition udder s. 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code was filed on the 26th for the production of the respondents and for their being set at liberty and it is this application that was allowed by the learned Judges.
The learned Judge before whom the application was placed directed numberice to the State of Uttar Pradesh and required the State to take all possible steps to detain these two persons and produce them before the Court.
Thereupon they moved the High Court by a petition under Art.
Both the supplementary applications dated July 25, 1960 to revive the petition dated July 22, 1960, as well as the fresh substantive petition dated July 26,1960, came up for orders before the Bench on July 26, 1960, and the learned Judges, after disposing of the supplementary application by directing that numberorders were necessary thereon because of the other petition, passed an order on the petition dated July 26, 1960, that it would be taken up for hearing the next day i.e., 27th at 2 P.M. and, also directed that the respondents should be produced in Court at the time of the hearing.
At 10.15 a.m. on July 26, 1960, the High Court directed the respon dents to be produced in companyrt at 2 p.m. on July 27, 1960 to which time the petition for habeas companypus, filed by the respondents, was posted for hearing.
The matter came on for final orders on July 28, 1960, when the learned Judges held that the respondents bad been detained in violation of the provisions of Art.
The order number having been companyplied with the police took the two respondents into custody on the evening of July 21, 1960, at about 6 p.m. and sent them on by train to Amritsar for being deported to Pakistan.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated July 28, 1960, of the Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench at Lucknow in Cr.
the learned Judges in their order stated that the two respondents had been sent away to Amritsar and were numberlonger within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court, and recorded We find that we have numberjurisdiction in the matter Their further direction was The proceedings are companysigned to records Certain matters, however, transpired on July 23, 1960, to which it is necessary immediately to refer.
kept in Civil Lines Than .till further orders.
Meanwhile, after the departure of the respondents from Lucknow, proceedings were started on their behalf under s. 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahadad High Court.
The respondents took advantage of this order for their release on bail and they were accordingly released the same day.
certain terms.
Immediately on their arrival a supplementary application was filed for reviving the petition which had been disposed of earlier in the morning founded upon the ground that the respondents were then at Lucknow within the jurisdiction of the Court and praying for a direction that the respondents be released on bail.
They were ordered by the said Magistrate to be.
They were brought back to Lucknow in the afternoon on July 25 1960, and, immediately thereafter they were produced before the Deputy Registrar, High Court Lucknow Bench, who directed them to be produced before the Court at 10.15 a.m on the next day.
The petition was adjourned to July 28, 1960 and the MO Court directed the ,two applicants to be released on bail on.
The petition was taken up on July 27, 1960, as directed the previous day when the learned Government Advocate prayed for an adjournment of one day, i.e., till July 28, 1960, to enable him to file proper affidavits particularly as regards the bogus companymunication received by the police at Amritsar which was responsible for the respondents being brought back to Lucknow.
In the petition, besides repeating the allegations already made in the petition filed on July 22.
22 2 of the Constitution and therefore directed their being set at liberty.
226 of the Constitution to have this order of the rejection of their application set aside but the petition was dismissed in April, 1959.
The last extension applied for was on December 22, 1959, but this was rejected and the government passed an order on July 7, 1960, requiring them to leave India within 24 hours after its service upon them.
The police at Amritsar having been informed that, the High Court had directed the two respondents to he produced before it, the police companystables who escorted the respondents from Amritsar immediately on arrival produced them before the Deputy Registrar of the High Court and this officer passed an order in these terms The detenues who were brought from Amritsar today at about 3 P.M. to this Court are sent back under the same custody with the direction that the Head Constableshould produce them before this Court at 10.15 A.M. tomorrow, the 26th July.
The State filed a companynter affidavit on July.
1960, challenging the validity of the deportation order, a fresh one was added which ran Since July 21, 1960 the applicants are in custody without being produced before any Magistrate and hence the provisions of Art.
This application was filed on July 22, 1960.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
One other fact requires mention.
for temporary stay, which permitted them to remain in India till December 16, 1955.
The Head Constable who had the custody of the respondents produced them before the Reader of the District Magistrate, Amritsar as directed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kanpur and the Reader took them by about 10 a.m. to a Magistrate who ordered that they be kept in the Civil Lines Thana till further orders.
and the Head Constable made an endorsement on the order undertaking to produce as directed.
The visa granted to them was of the C category s.e.,
It is number almost companymon ground that the telephone call as well as the telegram were spurious and did number emanate from the authorities at Lucknow.
They reached Amritsar in the early hours on July 23, 1960, and were produced before a Magistrate at Amritsar at 10 a.m. on the same day.
While there, they obtained a Pakistani passport on September 6, 1955, and obtained from the Deputy Indian High Commissioner on September 17,1955, a visa to enter India which they did on September 22, 1955.
48 of 1961.
by the police on July 21, 1960 at about 6 p.m. Soon thereafter, they were sent by train to Amritsar for being deported to Pakistan.
case No 186 of 1960.
The respondents with their escort reached Amritsar in the early hours of July 23, 1960.
C. Mathur and C. P. Lal, for the appellant.
was delivered by Ayyangar, J., Subba Rao, J., delivered separate Judgment.
P. Sinha and M. I. Khwaja, for the respondents.
AYYANGAR, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the High Court of Allahabad by which it allowed a petition under s. 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code filed on behalf of the respondents.
The petition under s. 491, of the Criminal Procedure Code was taken up for hearing by the Court on July 25, 1960, as originally fixed, and after perusing the companynter affidavit filed on behalf of the State.,
It is the companyrectness of this order that is challenged by the State in this appeal.
The Amritsar police however acted on these messages and immediately made arrangements for transporting the respondents back to Lucknow where they arrived at about 1 P.M. on July 25, 1960, by which time it would be numbericed the petition filed on July 22, 1960, had been disposed of by the High Court by being companysigned to records.
They were produced accordingly at 2 p.m. on that day and by a further order of July 27, 1960, the learned Judges bad dir ected the release of the respondents on ail and in pursuance of this order the, respondents had been released on July 27, 1960, itself.
The Judgment of Sinha, C. J., Ayyangar, Mudholkar and Aiyar, JJ.,
The two respondents, who are husband, and wife, were in Pakistan in March 1955.
March 16.
We shall number narrate the facts which are number in dispute.
Thereafter orders were issued by the State Government and served on them asking them to leave India but they repeatedly applied for and were granted extensions of time for so doing.
On August 10, 1957, they applied for their registration as Indian citizens but the application was rejected on October 18, 1957.
narration, was deliberately false, and it ended with the prayer that the State be restrained from effecting the deportation of the respondents to Pakistan.
The two respondents, husband and wife, were arrested at Lucknow.
15 A.M. on July 25, 1960, at which hour the respondents were, directed to be produced before the Court.
22 2 of the Constitution and, therefore, directed them to be set at liberty.
