G.D. Srivastava, J. - (1.) This is a habeas corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by six students of the Allahabad University. The facts, as disclosed from the affidavits of the petitioners, are that these petitioners and the students of the Allahabad University were complaining against corruption and nepotism prevailing in the University and they were also dissatisfied with the altitude of the executive authorities, particularly their failure to trace out the culprits responsible for the murder of two students of the University. The various allegations in this regard are to be found in paras 1 to 32 of the affidavit, but for the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to mention in detail the particulars in this regard. The students prepared a charter of demands including demands of an open enquiry into the charges of embezzlement, corruption and nepotism and tracing out the culprits of the aforesaid two murders. The students first attempted to present their charter of demands to the Vice-Chancellor, but because he was not available in this office, this charter was pasted outside his office. Thereafter it was decided that on 15-1-1975 the student would stage a peaceful demonstration in front of the District Magistrate for redress of their grievances. Consequently thousands of students staged a demonstration on the aforesaid date and presented their charter of demands and they also warned the authorities that if no action was taken, they would, resort to dharna and other peaceful agitation methods. It is said that when nothing was done by the executive authorities, there was a meeting of the students in the University campus on 16-1-1975 and it was decided that 17-1-1975 would be observed as a day of demands demonstration. On 17-1-1975, therefore, a big procession of students started from the University and as soon as it came out from the gate, the Police posted there at once swooped upon the students and arrested these six petitioners who were taken on a Police Van to Police Station Cantt., and thereafter they were sent to Jail. Inside the Jail, proceedings under Sections 107/117 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were also taken against the petitioners. The petitioners have, therefore, challenged their detention on the following grounds: (1) the arrest and detention of the petitioners is mala fide; (2) the petitioners were not informed about the reasons for their arrest at the time of arrest or immediately thereafter; (3) the petitioners were not presented before any Magistrate within 24 hours of their arrest; (4) there is no proper order of remand authorising their detention inside the Jail.
(2.) The petitioners have also challenged the authority of the Police to arrest them at the University gate and they have also questioned the validity of the proceedings under Section 107/117 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. At this very stage it may be noted that because the petitioners were committing a cognizable offence, punishable under Section 188, I.P.C. the Police had authority to arrest them without warrants and at any place where the offence was being committed. So far as the proceedings under Section 107/117 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are concerned, the legality of those proceedings cannot be considered by the court in this petition, simply because the petitioners have their remedy by preferring an appeal or revision, as the case may be, in a higher court.
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by Suresh Singh, who is the complainant in Crime Case No. 63 under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, and who is at present posted as Inspector In-charge of Police Station, Colonelganj, Allahabad. In the counter affidavit, it has been stated that on 17-1-1975 these petitioners and some other students were taking out a procession in violation of the prohibitory order promulgated under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and when the deponent wanted to stop the procession, the possession replied that they required no permission and that they would defy the orders of the Government, and, therefore, there was no alternative but to arrest the petitioners. In the counter affidavit it has been stated that the petitioners were informed of the grounds of their arrest, as mentioned in the First Information Report (Annexure 1). It has then been said that immediately after their arrest, the petitioners were produced before Sri D.B. Mathur, Judicial Magistrate, who remanded them to custody on 17-1-1975 at 4.30 p.m. Regarding the proceedings under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it has been said that they were dropped by the Magistrate on 1-2-1975. Out of these six petitioners, Sarvashri Bal Ganga Dhar, Sarvesh Chandra and Brijesh Kumar were released on bail in crime No. 63 under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act on 25-1-1975. A rejoinder affidavit has also been filed, in which the allegations contained in the original affidavit have been repeated.;