Skip to content

ADVOCATETANMOY LAW LIBRARY

Research & Library Database

Primary Menu
  • News
  • Opinion
  • Countries198
    • National Constitutions: History, Purpose, and Key Aspects
  • Judgment
  • Book
  • Legal Brief
    • Legal Eagal
  • LearnToday
  • HLJ
    • Supreme Court Case Notes
    • Daily Digest
  • Sarvarthapedia
    • Sarvarthapedia (Core Areas)
    • Systemic-and-systematic
    • Volume One
05/04/2026
  • Law Library

BUDH SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB [All SC 2000 April]

advtanmoy 30/11/2018 4 minutes read

ยฉ Advocatetanmoy Law Library

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
SUPREME COURT

Home ยป Law Library Updates ยป Law Library ยป BUDH SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB [All SC 2000 April]

The mandate of Section 167 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 postulates that there cannot be any detention in police custody, after the expiry of the first 15 days, so far as an accused is concerned. That period of 15 days had in this case admittedly expired on 4.1.2000. The impugned order of the High Court violates the statutory provisions contained in Section 167 Cr.P.C. Since it authorises police remand for a period of seven days after the expiry of the first fifteen days period.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

FULL BENCH

Read Next

  • THE NATIONAL SPORTS GOVERNANCE ACT, 2025
  • 2016 Report of Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt of India
  • The Number ฯ€ (Pi): History, Properties, and Importance in Mathematics

( Before : A. S. Anand, C.J; S. N. Variava, J; R. C. Lahoti, J )

BUDH SINGH โ€” Appellant

Vs.

STATE OF PUNJAB โ€” Respondent

Read Next

  • THE NATIONAL SPORTS GOVERNANCE ACT, 2025
  • 2016 Report of Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt of India
  • The Number ฯ€ (Pi): History, Properties, and Importance in Mathematics

Criminal Appeal No. 327 of 2000 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 518 of 2000)

Decided on : 03-04-2000

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 167

Read Next

  • THE NATIONAL SPORTS GOVERNANCE ACT, 2025
  • 2016 Report of Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt of India
  • The Number ฯ€ (Pi): History, Properties, and Importance in Mathematics

Cases Referred

Central Bureau of Investigation, Special Investigation Cell-I, New Delhi Vs. Anupam J. Kulkarni, AIR 1992 SC 1768 : (1992) CriLJ 2768 : (1992) 2 Crimes 310 : (1992) 3 JT 366 : (1992) 1 SCALE 1024 : (1992) 3 SCC 141 : (1992) 3 SCR 158

ORDER

Dr. A.S. Anand, C.J.I.

1. Leave granted.

2. The facts are not in dispute. On 20th January, 1999, on rejection of the application for anticipatory bail, in case FIR No. 43 of 4.5.1999 the appellant surrendered before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and was remanded to judicial custody. Thereafter, while still in judicial custody, by an order dated 23rd December, 1999, the matter was adjourned at the request of the investigating agency to 2nd January, 2000. The appellant was again remanded to judicial custody till 2nd January, 2000. It transpires that on 2.1.2000, on the request of the investigating agency for grant of police remand of the appellant, one day’s police remand was granted by the Court and police remand was further extended by one day on 3rd January, 2000. On 4th January, 2000, the investigating officer made yet another application seeking further police remand of the appellant for a period of seven days. The learned Judicial Magistrate , First Class, Ludhiana declined the request of the police for further police remand of the appellant and remanded him to judicial custody till 18th January, 2000.

3. Aggrieved by the order dated 4.1.2000, State filed a revision before the learned Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, which was dismissed on 17.1.2000. The State, thereafter, filed a petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. in the High Court and by the order impugned before us a learned Single Judge of the High Court directed the Judicial Magistrate, First Class Ludhiana to grant police remand of the appellant for a further period of seven days. This appeal, by special leave is directed against that order.

4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

5. In the face of facts, as noticed above, the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, dated 4.1.2000, in our opinion, did not require any interference. The man date of Section 167 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 postulates that there cannot be any detention in police custody, after the expiry of the first 15 days, so far as an accused is concerned. That period of 15 days had in this case admittedly expired on 4.1.2000. The impugned order of the High Court violates the statutory provisions contained in Section 167 Cr.P.C. Since it authorises police remand for a period of seven days after the expiry of the first fifteen days period. In Central Bureau of Investigation, Special Investigation Cell-I, New Delhi Vs. Anupam J. Kulkarni, this Court considered the ambit and scope of Section 167 Cr.P.C. and held that there cannot be any detention in police custody after the expiry of the first 15 days even in a case where some more offences, either serious or other wise committed by an accused in the same transaction come to light at a later stage. The Bench, however clarified that the bar did not apply if the same arrested accused was involved in some other or different case arising out of a different transaction, in which event the period of remand needs to be considered in respect to each of such cases. The impugned order of the High Court under the circumstances, cannot be sustained. The direction to grant police remand for a period of seven days by the High Court is, accordingly, set aside. The appeal, therefore, succeeds and is allowed to the extent indicated above.

6. The appellant is stated to be in judicial custody. In case, he applies for bail, his application for bail shall he considered on merits and what we have stated hereinabove, shall not be construed as an expression of any opinion on the merits of the case.

(2000) 41 ACrC 590 : (2000) 4 AICLR 307 : (2001) AIR(SCW) 2270 : (2000) 3 AllCrlRulings 2111 : (2000) 3 AllCrlRulings 2111 : (2001) CriLJ 2942 : (2001) 1 ECrC 68 : (2000) 8 JT 511 : (2000) 3 KLT(SN) 24 : (2000) 9 SCC 266 : (2000) 7 SLT 120


Post navigation

Previous: No detention in police custody after expiry of first 15 days even in a case where some more serious offences, committed by an accused in same transaction come to light at a later stage
Next: Police remand can be sought U/S 167(2) of Code in respect of an accused arrested at the stage of further investigation if interrogation is needed by investigating agency.
Communism
Sarvarthapedia

Manifesto of the Communist Party 1848: History, Context, and Core Concepts

Arrest
Sarvarthapedia

Latin Maxims in Criminal Law: Meaning, Usage, and Courtroom Application

Rule of Law vs Rule by Law and Rule for Law: History, Meaning, and Global Evolution

IPS Cadre Strength 2025: State-wise Authorised Strength

Uric Acid: From 18th Century Discovery to Modern Medical Science

Christian Approaches to Interfaith Dialogue: Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, and Pentecostal Views

Origin of Central Banking in India: From Hastings to RBI and the History of Preparatory Years (1773โ€“1934)

Howrah District Environment Plan: Waste Management, Water Quality & Wetland Conservation

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023: Sections (1-358), Punishments, and Legal Framework

Bengali Food Culture: History, Traditions, and Class Influences

West Bengal Court-Fees Act, 1970: Fees, Schedules, and Procedures

WB Land Reforms Tribunal Act 1997: History, Features, Provisions, Structure, Powers and Functions

Civil Procedure Law of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (1976)

Knowledge Management in the Modern Era: From History to Digital Transformation

  • Sarvarthapedia

  • Delhi Law Digest

  • Howrah Law Journal

  • Amit Aryaย vs Kamlesh Kumari:ย Doctrine of merger
  • David Vs. Kuruppampady: SLP against rejecting review by HC (2020)
  • Nazim & Ors. v. State of Uttarakhand (2025 INSC 1184)
  • Geeta v. Ajay: Expense for daughter`s marriage allowed in favour of the wife
  • Ram v. Sukhram: Tribal women’s right in ancestral property [2025] 8 SCR 272
  • Naresh vs Aarti: Cheque Bouncing Complaint Filed by POA (02/01/2025)
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS)
  • Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 (BSA): Indian Rules for Evidence
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023
  • The Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)
  • Supreme Court Daily Digest
  • U.S. Supreme Court Orders
  • U.k. Supreme Court Orders
Sarvarthapedia, Law and Legal Materials

Rule of Law vs Rule by Law and Rule for Law: History, Meaning, and Global Evolution

Indian Government

IPS Cadre Strength 2025: State-wise Authorised Strength

Sarvarthapedia

Uric Acid: From 18th Century Discovery to Modern Medical Science

Christian Education

Christian Approaches to Interfaith Dialogue: Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, and Pentecostal Views

2026 ยฉ Advocatetanmoy Law Library

  • About
  • Global Index
  • Judicial Examinations
  • Indian Statutes
  • Glossary
  • Legal Eagle
  • Subject Guide
  • Journal
  • SCCN
  • Constitutions
  • Legal Brief (SC)
  • MCQs (Indian Laws)
  • Sarvarthapedia (Articles)
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • FAQs
  • Library Updates