Skip to main content

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ARREST AND CUSTODY


               DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ARREST AND CUSTODY


INTRODUCTION

The word custody and arrest are synonyms but actually they are not similar. Arrest is the first stage and custody is the second stage in a crime. The word arrest is derived from a French word arret which means to stop or to stay and the word custody means guardianship, keeping and safekeeping. In every arrest there is custody but in every custody there is no arrest. For example if an accused directly surrender under the magistrate there is no arrest there is only custody. Arrest can be done by police officer and also by private individual.

CUSTODY

 The definition of custody is provided under section 27 of the Indian evidence act, 1872. The provision for holding a person in custody in order to proceed further with the investigation process governed by Section 167 of the code of criminal procedure Custody denotes surveillance or restriction on the movements of the individual connected. There are mainly two type of custody:

1) Police custody.

2) Judicial custody.

Police custody just means an individual is being controlled by the police, is placed in a cell in the police station. Sometimes, the individual might be placed in house custody all things being equal. The police have the power to confine an individual just on doubt yet they should demonstrate their case inside distinct time-frame. Overall they don't do that recklessly, for example without at first sight proof. He cannot be held so endlessly, charges should be documented against him, he should be delivered before a judge inside a specific time period. In certain nations, an individual cannot be held in police custody for over 24 hours. Magistrate can extend custody till 15 days. The duration of custody can be utilized uniquely for addressing, should be given admittance to his lawyer. Police can interrogate the person without magistrate’s permission and the security is given by the police.

Judicial custody implies, the individual is held with judicial endorsement. When the charges are made and the individual is delivered before an officer, the police here and there argue for proceeding with custody of the individual. The grounds will be, delivering the individual could be truly affecting either the evidence against him/her or different people, and so forth In the event that the judge is persuaded, he/she endorses the police to keep on holding him for a predefined term (ordinarily, for a couple of days). Then, at that point, the denounced is moved to a proper jail. Since he isn't a convict at this stage, he would not be dependent upon the full arrangement of limitations a convict be able to can be put to. For instance, a charged in judicial custody would not be made to do be able to any work. Judicial custody can be extended till 90 days in case which have punishment for more than 10 years and 60 days in case of other offences.in judicial custody only magistrate has right to interrogate and the security is given by magistrate.

CONCLUSION

Rights are accessible to each resident of the country. Indeed, even an individual who is blamed for an offense has different rights some of which are fundamental in nature. The accused can in the event that for resistance of these arrangements approach the court where cure is accessible. Then again, the police specialists are needed to follow the procedure given in Chapter V of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

The law accommodates the protections against misuse however there is a need to eliminate all inconsistencies and obstacles. The Magistrate should see the casualty's experience prior to passing requests. There is a need to grow Section 167 with the goal that the cures should be accessible for the past unlawful capture and detainments. The Executive should ensure that individuals under care know about their rights.


By,

Asha Sebastian.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree