Jayrajsinh Temubha Jadeja v. State of Gujarat -(2005) 1 GLR 181 (Gujarat High Court)

Posted on March 6, 2026 by Admin

Jayrajsinh Temubha Jadeja v. State of Gujarat

1️⃣ Citation

(2005) 1 GLR 181 (Gujarat High Court)
(2005) 2 RCR (Criminal) 758
Special Criminal Application No. 420 of 2004
Decided on: 30 April 2004
Judge: Justice Sharad D. Dave

2️⃣ Facts of the Case

The accused persons were arrested in connection with a criminal offence registered at Gondal Police Station.
They were produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM).
Police sought 14 days police remand.
The Magistrate granted 2 days police remand only.

After expiry:

Police again sought further police custody remand of 7 days.
The Magistrate rejected the second remand request.

The State preferred Revision before Sessions Court, which partly allowed the revision and granted further police remand.

The accused then approached the Gujarat High Court under Section 482 CrPC challenging that order.

3️⃣ Core Legal Issue

⚖ Whether police custody remand can be granted again after the Magistrate has already rejected further remand and the accused are in judicial custody?

4️⃣ Observations of Gujarat High Court

The High Court examined:

Section 167 CrPC
nature of police custody vs judicial custody
powers of revisional court

The Court observed:

Police custody must be strictly controlled because it affects personal liberty under Article 21.
Once the Magistrate rejects remand, the revisional court must exercise great caution.
Police remand cannot be granted mechanically merely because investigation is incomplete.
The Court emphasized that:

Police remand is an exception and must be justified by specific investigation requirements, not general allegations.

5️⃣ Ratio Decidendi (Legal Principle)

✅ Police custody remand cannot be granted casually or repeatedly unless strong investigation necessity is shown.

Key principle:

⚖ Remand must be based on specific reasons showing why custodial interrogation is necessary.

6️⃣ Final Decision

Gujarat High Court interfered with the Sessions Court order.
It held that the revisional court had not properly examined the legality of remand.
The order granting further police custody was set aside / scrutinized strictly.

7️⃣ Practical Trial Court Utility (For Magistrates)

Magistrate must check before granting remand:

1️⃣ Whether specific investigation steps require custody
2️⃣ Whether evidence recovery is possible only through custodial interrogation
3️⃣ Whether grounds are vague or mechanical
4️⃣ Whether IO is seeking remand only for convenience

If not satisfied:

⚖ Remand must be rejected.

8️⃣ Ready-to-Use Judgment Sentence (Trial Court)

You can directly use this line in remand orders:

“Police custody cannot be granted as a matter of routine. Unless the Investigating Agency demonstrates specific and compelling reasons necessitating custodial interrogation, the liberty of the accused cannot be curtailed. This principle has been reiterated by the Gujarat High Court in Jayrajsinh Temubha Jadeja v. State of Gujarat (2005) 1 GLR 181.”

9️⃣ Ultra-Short Exam / Judicial Service Note

Point	Principle
Subject	Police Remand
Provision	Section 167 CrPC
Rule	Remand must be justified by investigation necessity
Court	Gujarat High Court
Citation	(2005) 1 GLR 181
Key Use	Rejecting mechanical police remand