Discuss the provisions in CrPC regarding the attendance in the Court, of persons confined or detained in prisons.
Question: Discuss the provisions in CrPC regarding the attendance in the Court, of persons confined or detained in prisons. Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [Discuss the provisions in CrPC regarding the attendance in the Court, of persons confined or detained in prisons.] Answer Section 267 in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 lays down provisions regarding… Read More »
Question: Discuss the provisions in CrPC regarding the attendance in the Court, of persons confined or detained in prisons. Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [Discuss the provisions in CrPC regarding the attendance in the Court, of persons confined or detained in prisons.] Answer Section 267 in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 lays down provisions regarding the power to require the attendance of prisoners. The section runs as under: (1) whenever, in the course of an inquiry, trial,...
Question: Discuss the provisions in CrPC regarding the attendance in the Court, of persons confined or detained in prisons.
Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [Discuss the provisions in CrPC regarding the attendance in the Court, of persons confined or detained in prisons.]
Answer
Section 267 in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 lays down provisions regarding the power to require the attendance of prisoners. The section runs as under:
(1) whenever, in the course of an inquiry, trial, or other proceedings under this Code, it appears to a Criminal Court,-
(a) that a person confined or detained in a prison should be brought before the Court for answering to a charge of an offence, or for the purpose of any proceedings against him, or
(b) that it is necessary for the ends of justice to examine such person as a witness, the Court may make an order requiring the officer in charge of the prison to produce such person before the Court for answering to the charge or for the purpose of such proceeding or, as the case may be, for giving evidence.
(2) Where an order under sub-section (1) is made by a Magistrate of the second class, it shall not be forwarded to or acted upon by, the officer in charge of the prison unless it is countersigned by the Chief Judicial Magistrate to whom such Magistrate is subordinate.
(3) Every order submitted for countersigning under sub-section (2) shall be accompanied by a statement of the facts which, in the opinion of the Magistrate, render the order necessary, and the Chief Judicial Magistrate to whom it is submitted may, after considering such statement, decline to countersign the order.”
This section empowers the Court to direct the officer-in-charge of the prison to produce a detenu before it if the Court is of the opinion that his presence is necessary:
- for answering to a charge of an offence or
- for the purpose of any proceedings against him or
- if it is necessary for the ends of justice to examine such a person as a witness.
The explanation to this section empowers the Courts to direct the Officer in charge to bring forth a detenue before it if the Court believes that it is prudent to do so for several reasons such as answering to a charge of an offence or for the purpose of conducting any proceedings against him or to examine him as a witness to meet the interests of justice.
In Mohd Daud v. Superintendent, District Jail, Moradabad [1993 CrLJ 1358 (All)] it was held that where an accused was arrested and detained in Maharashtra under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [NDPS Act], brought to Moradabad in UP in connection with another case, it was held that after the end of the trial at Moradabad, he has to be conveyed back to the prison from where he was brought and it cannot be said that his confinement under NDPS Act, in Maharashtra automatically came to an end or became non-existent on his transfer to Moradabad.
In the case of Bharti Sachdeva v. State of Rajasthan [1996 CrLJ 2102 (Raj)], a person detained in jail in Indore was brought to Kota under a production warrant for investigation for another offence, it was held to be illegal as the production warrant could only be issued for inquiry, trial or other proceedings or for answering charges or for being examined as a witness and not for investigation of another offence.
Important Mains/Long Questions for Judiciary, APO & University Exams
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part I: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part II: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part III: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part IV: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part V: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VI: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VII: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VIII: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part IX: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part X: Important Questions
- CRPC Mains Questions Series Part XI: Important Questions
Admin Legal Bites
Legal Bites Study Materials correspond to what is taught in law schools and what is tested in competitive exams. It pledges to offer a competitive advantage, prepare for tests, and save a lot of money.