measure (within 72 hours)22. When the above time limits are exceeded, the persons apprehended on suspicion of crime must be released immediately. Failure to comply with requirements on indication of the actual time of apprehension often results in illegal violation of time limits for presenting a person with a notice of suspicion, or detention of the apprehended person in the absence of investigating judge’s or court’s ruling. Examples of typical violations: On 19 November 2014, during a visit to Kirovohrad city department of the MIA Directorate in Kirovohrad region, the report on apprehension of a person suspected of the commission of crime, in violation of Article 208 §5 of the CPC, the indicated time of apprehension was the time when the report was drawn up at Kirovohrad city department of the MIA Directorate in Kirovohrad region. Meanwhile, the time, place, date and exact time (hour and minute) of actual apprehension are not indicated in violation of Article 209 of the CPC. The report on apprehension of S. contains the following as date, time and place of apprehension: 18.11.2014, 17:30 at office #406 of Kirovohrad city department of the MIA Directorate in Kirovohrad region. The apprehended person stated that actual apprehension took place at 11:00 on 18.11.2014 near his house. On 30 May 2014, the visit to Svyatoshyn district directorate of the Main MIA Directorate in Kyiv and inspection of reports on apprehension of persons suspected of the commission of crime showed that investigators of investigation unit of Svyatoshyn district directorate V. and S. violate article 208 §5 of the CPC on recording the actual time and place of apprehension in accordance with Article 209 of the CPC. Contrary to requirements of Article 208 §5 of the CPC, reports on apprehension of persons suspected of the commission of crimes A.H.N., I.T.T., A.K.N., and H.D.S. the time and place of apprehension were indicated as the time of drawing up the reports at Svyatoshyn district directorate of the Main MIA Directorate in Kyiv. The inspection showed discrepancy between records in reports on apprehension and actual time and place of apprehension in the meaning of Article 209 of the CPC. According to report on apprehension of I.T.T., the date, time and place of his apprehension are 30.05.2014 at 00:30 at Svyatoshyn district directorate of the Main MIA Directorate in Kyiv. The apprehended person indicated that his actual apprehension took place at 16:00 on 29.05.2014 at a bus stop at Pidlisna Street in Kyiv. 22 Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (article 211). 60