LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Arvind Singh Chauhan (advocate)     28 July 2010

42/102 Cr.P.C 411 I.P.C.

Accused was arrested with 45 Mobiles. Allegation is that he could not produce any papers and mobile may be stolen property . Magistrate accepted judicial remand request, and taken him to judicial custody Under Sec 42/102 Cr.P.C & 411 IPC.

Question is that Definition of stolen Property as provided Under Sec 410 IPC does not include this situation.

Under 42 Cr.P.C. police have power to arrest person if any body refuses to disclose his name and address but remand papers itself disclosing his name & address and it is mentioned that relative of accused have been informed about his arrest.

Under Sec 102 Cr.P.C any propery which is suspected may be seized by police.

Please advice whether is there any offence if yes What ? Bailable or Non bailable. Whether police could arrest him? Whether magistrate should accept the remand.

What step would be appropriate in favour of accused.



Learning

 5 Replies

Mugundhan (Lawyer)     28 July 2010

Dear friend, once the accused has been remanded and the magistrate has ordered judicial custody, the only appropriate step is to file a bail application-Best of Luck

Ayub S. Pathan (Legal Adviser)     28 July 2010

Mr. Arvind,

If YOU say that accused is taken in Juducial Custody Where is the question of arrest ?

Secondly you say that Judicial Remand is accepted by Magistrate then My dear the

question that Whether magistrate should accept remand does not Servive. so pl.

post the query to a logical end dependent upon factual problem, if any, that you are facing.

It will help to all the members to have actual judicial perception to their knoweledge.

Best Luck.

Ayub S. Pathan, Legal Adviser, Mah. State, CID, Pune.



Arvind Singh Chauhan (advocate)     28 July 2010

Respected members Don't you think that there are two options-

1. Revision or appeal against remand order.

2. Bail.

ashok bisht (none)     28 July 2010

why accusation under sec.379 is missing? kindly consider the presumption u/s 114 Evidence act as well as illustration (a) to it.


(Guest)

A accused could not be able to disclose the ownership of the articles which is in possession.  Also the articles may be a property of commission of offence.  If the accused produce the relevant document of ownership of the articles which were seized the judicial magistrate will close the case and release the accused.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query