A. LAKSHMANARAO versus JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, IST CLASS, PARVATIPURAM & ORS.

A. LAKSHMANARAO versus JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, IST CLASS, PARVATIPURAM & ORS.

Order of remand may be made in absence of accused; Section 344(1A) Cr.P.C. contains sufficient guidelines, is constitutional, and applies at investigation stage; explanation properly defines scope of 'reasonable cause'; remand orders are subject to judicial discretion and review.

Parties
Petitioner: A. Lakshmanarao; Respondent: Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parvatipuram
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 November 1970
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 (habeas Corpus) / Final Decision by Supreme Court
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Remand Orders, Validity of Section 344(1 A) Cr.p.c., Production of Accused, Guidelines for Remand, Right to Personal Liberty
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Remand Orders Validity of Section 344(1 A) Cr.p.c. Production of Accused Guidelines for Remand Right to Personal Liberty

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. Lakshmanarao

Petitioner

Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parvatipuram

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition Under Article 32 (habeas Corpus) / Final Decision by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether order of remand must be made in presence of accused to be valid
  2. 2 Whether s. 344(1A) Cr.P.C. lacks guidelines and is unconstitutional
  3. 3 Applicability of s. 344(1A) Cr.P.C. at investigation stage

Ratio Decidendi

Order of remand may be made in absence of accused; Section 344(1A) Cr.P.C. contains sufficient guidelines, is constitutional, and applies at investigation stage; explanation properly defines scope of 'reasonable cause'; remand orders are subject to judicial discretion and review.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petitioner's custody is not illegal; petition accordingly fails and is dismissed.