Kundan Singh, J. - (1.) Through this revision petition the applicants have called into question the validity of their detention and custody pursuant to ten successive remand orders passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr, on 3-9-93,17-9-93,1-10-93, 15-10-93, 29-10-93, 16-11-93, 30-11-93, 13-12-93, 21-12-93 and 4-1-94, in Case Crime No. 196 of 1993, under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 IPC of police station Debai, District Bulandshahr.
(2.) The contention of the learned Counsel of the applicants is that except the aforesaid ten orders there is no other order of remand sending the applicants to custody and the remand orders have been passed for more than 15 days at a time for which no reason has been assigned. Further, some of the remand orders are in respect of two accused only and there is no order of remand in respect of others, hence then custody and detention of the accused is illegal and they deserve to be set at liberty forthwith.
(3.) On 3-9-93 the charge sheet was filed in court and the Chief-Judicial Magistrate took cognisance in the matter. He directed the accused to be sent to Jail after preparing remand order under Sec. 209 Cr. PC. The U.P. Government has introduced amendment in Sec. 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and according to that amendment, the accused will be remanded to custody till committal of the case to the court of Session, which will continue during and until conclusion of the trial. After that amendment similar controversy relating to remand came up for consideration before this Court in the case of Nooral Huda v. Superintendent of Central Jail, Naini, Allahabad reported in 1984 ALJ 561. While dealing with the crucial question of custody and detention pursuant to remand orders the Division Bench held that when a valid remand order is passed after submissions of the charge sheet, then all previous irregularities or illegalities occurring in connection with the order of remand passed under Sec. 167 Cr P.C. stand cured as orders of remand then would be covered by the provisions of Sec. 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In such a case the question of releasing a person from custody or detention authorised by any particular order of remand or detention order would not arise since the last order or remand whereby the accused is remanded to custody is a valid order. In this regard both statutory or constitutional illegalities, meaning thereby the violation of any provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure or any Article of the Constitution of India, relating to arrest or custody stand at par and the remedy of the so-called aggrieved person who regards himself to be victim of illegal custody or detention in violation of statutory or constitutional provisions, if advised, may lie in claiming damages.;