Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 63,167,169,561A

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 392,380,457

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------Ss. 63, 167, 169 & 561-A---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 392, 380 & 457--Robbery, theft in dwelling house, lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night in order to commit offence---Physical remand---Refusal---Scope---Physical remand of the accused was declined and he was discharged by the Magistrate--Validity---Presentation of the accused before the Judicial Magistrate would serve no purpose if the Magistrate is to blindly remand the accused in the custody of police for up to a period of fifteen days (i.e. the maximum period for which physical remand is permissible)---Thus, there is no reason why the fundamental right to liberty of an accused would be denied to him on the basis of bald allegations in a complaint that has taken the form of an FIR unless there is some incriminating material on the basis of which police authorities can satisfy the Judicial Magistrate that the accused is liable for an offence that requires his arrest for purposes of investigation---Section 63 of Cr.P.C gives the Judicial Magistrate the power to pass a special order or discharge the accused where the material collected by police authorities up until such time is not such that implicates the accused or justifies his arrest and/or continued detention---Such order of discharge does not prohibit the police from continuing the investigation and collecting further evidence against the person who has been discharged---In view of the record produced before the Court,including the report of the SP Police stating that the complainant had lodged false FIRs, including present FIR, which formed the subject-matter of the instant case and the finding of the Judicial Magistrate that at the time of alleged occurrence the accused was in another city and not in his city and could therefore not have been involved with the occurrence, High Court was not convinced that the impugned order was unjust, unfair and unreasonable or otherwise qualified as colorable exercise of the administrative authority vested in the Judicial Magistrate under S.63 of Cr.P.C.---Petition being without merit was dismissed.Iftikhar Ahmed v. The State PLD 2020 Lah. 931;…