Arvind Kumar Tripathi, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the Petitioner Mr. D.S. Mishra, learned AGA and perused the record.
(2.) THE present habeas corpus petition has been filed, challenging the detention of the Petitioner in Central Jail, Naini, with the prayer to declare the custody of the Petitioner at Central Jail, Naini, illegal and unconstitutional and to set him at liberty, forthwith. The solitary confinement during his judicial custody has also been challenged. The Petitioner is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 327 of 2010, under Section 302, 307, 427, 429, 120B Indian Penal Code and Section 3/5 Explosive Substance Act and Section 2/3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti -Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Kotwali, District Allahbad at Central Jail, Naini, Allahabad. The first information report was lodged by informant Kamal Kumar on 12.7.2010. According to the counsel for the Petitioner, Petitioner was innocent and he was not involved in the aforesaid criminal case. Further case of the Petitioner is that Petitioner was lifted from his house, by the police, without disclosing any reason on 13.7.2010 at about 7.00 P.M. The information was given through telegram on 14.7.2010 to the District Judge and D.M., Allahabad. The Petitioner was not produced before the Magistrate, concerned within 24 hours after arrest and his arrest was shown on 14.7.2010 at 10.00 P.M. near Malahara Railway Gate. However, the telegram has already been sent at about 1.10. P.M. regarding arrest of the Petitioner. The detention order has been challenged on the ground that: i. the Petitioner has been confined in judicial custody, however, there is no separate remand order on the order -sheet. ii. the Petitioner was not produced within 24 hours before the Magistrate, concerned after arrest. iii. the Petitioner was not informed regarding reason and ground of his arrest. iv. he has been kept in solitary confinement in view to harass and torture him mentally and physically and there is violation of Article 21 and 22 Constitution of India, Section 50 and Section 57 Code of Criminal Procedure hence his detention is illegal and he is entitled to be set at liberty.
(3.) THE allegation made on behalf of the Petitioner was denied by learned AGA in counter affidavit filed by Deputy Jailer, Central Jail, Naini, Allahabad. The allegation regarding inhuman treatment and that he was deprived off basic immunities was denied. It was further stated that Petitioner was sent to jail in pursuance to the valid order of remand passed by the C.J.M., Allahabad. He was produced before the court as and when directed by the court. Copy of the custody warrant issued under Section 167 Code of Criminal Procedure, by the C.J.M. on 15.7.2010 has been filed as annexure No. 1 with counter affidavit. The Petitioner was being provided all the basic immunities for which he was entitled, including medical facilities. An application was also moved before the C.J.M. on 22.7.2010 on which a comment was called for and the direction was also issued to provide medical aid. The report was submitted before the C.J.M. It was informed that the Petitioner was being kept in high security barrak to avoid any mishappening in the jail. The Petitioner was also given in police remand in pursuance to the order passed by the C.J.M., Allahabad and the necessary direction etc. were given when he was again admitted on 28.7.2010. He was checked up by the jail doctor, who found him to be hail and healthy, his blood pressure was normal. The high security barracks are in an area of 1500 sq. feet and high security barracks exist opposite to each other. Other accused were also kept in high security barracks. In between the barracks there is a courtyard of 60' x 30' and during day time the prisoners were being released from barrack and they use to assemble in the courtyard. The Petitioner is detained in pursuance to the valid order of remand hence the habeaus corpus petition is not maintainable.;