Arrest Begins When Liberty Is Restrained, Not When Police Record It: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Release In NDPS Case

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that arrest commences the moment a person's liberty is restrained and not from the time recorded in police documents. The Court observed that an entry in police records regarding the time of arrest is not conclusive, and the actual test is the factual restraint on the movement of the individual.Justice Sumeet Goel was hearing a petition filed by Anuj Kumar Singh seeking a declaration that his arrest by the Narcotics Control Bureau was illegal and for his release on the ground that he was detained beyond 24 hours without being produced before a Magistrate. The case arose from an NDPS investigation involving the alleged illegal diversion of psychotropic medicines through certain firms, including the petitioner's firm. The prosecution claimed that the petitioner voluntarily accompanied the NCB team from Dehradun to Chandigarh on 31.10.2025 and was formally arrested at 9:00 PM on 01.11.2025, whereas the petitioner contended that he was in continuous custody since the night of 31.10.2025 and was effectively detained much earlier than the recorded time of arrest.The Court examined the factual sequence and noted that the petitioner remained with the NCB team from about 11:00 PM on 31.10.2025, travelled with them to Chandigarh, and continued to remain under their control till his formal arrest at 9:00 PM on 01.11.2025 and subsequent production before the Magistrate on 02.11.2025. It held that such continuous control and restriction on movement constituted custody irrespective of the label assigned by the investigating agency.The Court analysed Section 57 CrPC/Section 58 BNSS and Article 22(2) of the Constitution, emphasising that a person cannot be detained beyond 24 hours without judicial authorization. It held that the expression “arrest” must be understood in its real sense as a restraint on personal liberty and not merely a formal act recorded by authorities.The Court observed that the crucial test is whether the person was deprived of the freedom to move as he pleased, and once such a restraint begins, the period of 24 hours must be computed from that moment. It rejected the contention that the time of arrest mentioned in official records is determinative, holding that such an approach would allow investigating agencies to defeat constitutional safeguards. It observed: “An 'arrest' is crystallized the moment the individual's ambulatory providence is extinguished and his volition is subsumed by the coercive power of authority detaining him… The time recorded in the arrest memo or other police records is a mere procedural formality that cannot be treated as a definitive or infallible index of actual time of arrest.”Applying these principles, the Court found that the petitioner had been under effective custody of the NCB from the night of 31.10.2025 and was produced before the Magistrate only on 02.11.2025, thereby exceeding the permissible period of 24 hours. It held that such detention was in violation of statutory provisions and constitutional guarantees.Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition and directed the release of the petitioner, holding that his continued detention was illegal.Case Title: Anuj Kumar Singh vs. Union of India [CRM-M-2979-2026 (O&M)]Click Here To Read/Download Order

Arrest Begins When Liberty Is Restrained, Not When Police Record It: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Release In NDPS Case

Saksham Vaishya

Tags