MARFING TAMANG @ MAAINA TAMANG vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Judgment text excerpt

$~J- * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 4th February, 2025 + CRL.M.C. 4391/2024 & CRL.M.A. 19329/2024 MARFING TAMANG @ MAAINA TAMANG .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Adit S. Pujari and Ms. Shaurya Mittal, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for the State. SI Virender and SI Devi Prasad, P.S.: Kamla Market. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI J U D G M E N T ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI J. This case concerns an analysis of the precise definition of the word “forthwith” as used in section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (’Cr.P.C.‟) and the scope of the legal obligation it imposes on the State to supply the „grounds of arrest‟ to an arrestee. 2. By way of the present petition filed under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner impugns order dated 18.05.2024 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Tis Hazari District Courts, Delhi whereby the learned Magistrate remanded the petitioner to police custody for 02 days in case FIR No. 157/2024 dated 17.05.2024 registered under sections 342/344/365/368/370/370(A)/372/373/376/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 („IPC‟) and sections 3/4/5/6 of the Immoral Signature Not Verified Signed By:ANJALI KAUSHIK Signing Date:04.02.2025 14:47:31 CRL.M.C. 4391/2024 Page 1 of 26 Traffic (Prevention) Act 1956 („ITP Act‟) at P.S.: Kamla Market, Delhi. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 3. Briefly, the allegation against the petitioner is that he was the „Manager‟ of an establishment which was inter alia engaged in the sexual abuse and exploitation of victims and was living-of the gains of such activity, based on which allegation the subject FIR came to be registered against the petitioner. 4. Subsequently, the Investigating Officer („I.O.‟) moved an application seeking the pet