Article 199 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Articles 46 and 491 of the Police Rules, 1934 Cls 26 25 Constitutional / Habitat Corps request for recovery of Ditto records revealed that Ditno was arrested and subsequently injured. He was sent to the hospital, where if he was kept under surveillance, if any of the accused were taken into custody and kept in jail under the guards, it cannot be said that his arrest was subject to the Code of Conduct 1898. Section 46 was not made, if that police officer would touch the body of the accused or put him in prison. Or the accused would have been in custody through words or action, he would have been arrested, in the present case, the police had arrested Danto and then he was kept in a hospital under surveillance police. Could not say that the arresting police claim that Detino was involved in this heinous crime, so the investigation could not be postponed or arrested under Section 157, Prodiso (B) of CRPC. Was. Delayed under Chapter 26 2 of Police Rules, 1934, even if the accused was in a critical condition, he should have been formally arrested and should have been dealt with under Section 26 25 of Police Rules 1934. That they postponed the arrest. Completely deported and clearly unlawful Daito could not be considered legal or proper custody given that Dino's detention was declared illegal and he was ordered to live independently in the circumstances. \ R \ n
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
