The petitioner's grievance is that the police arrested him yesterday (on 19.12.2014), in connection with a case which stands quashed by this Court on 29.09.2010. In view of the serious allegation that the arrest and custody is illegal, I directed the learned Public Prosecutor to get instructions over telephone regarding the circumstance of arrest. Now, it is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, that the petitioner was of course arrested in execution of a warrant of arrest issued from the trial court in C.C.No.219/2002, but when he was produced in court, his counsel produced the order of this Court in Crl.M.C.No.2973/2010 quashing the prosecution, and in such circumstance he was released by the learned Magistrate. It is also submitted that the petitioner is in fact involved in two other crimes; one of the Hemambika Nagar Police Station as Crime No.602/2014, and the other of the Melattoor Police Station as Crime No.484/2014, and that both the crimes are now being Crl.M.C.. No. 7300/2014 2 investigated by the CBCID. On coming to know of the petitioner's arrest, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBCID made an application for permission of the learned Magistrate for formal arrest, and accordingly, his arrest was recorded by the police as permitted by the learned Magistrate. In the above situation, this Crl.M.C. cannot proceed. In view of the petitioner's arrest in other crimes, he will have to pursue appropriate remedies possible under the law. There is reason to believe that the order of this Court in Crl.M.C.No.2973/2010 was not promptly produced before the court by the petitioner, and that is why, warrant of arrest happened to be issued against him. Nobody can be blamed, because the accused himself failed to produce the order in court. In the above circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to pursue appropriate relief as regards the crimes wherein he is arrested by the police.
Sd/-
P. UBAID, JUDGE sd