Person arrested not to be detained more than twenty-four hours
Section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with person arrested not to be detained more than twenty-four hours. No police officer shall detain in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the absence of a special order of a Magistrate under section 167, exceed twenty- four hours exclusive of the time The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
No police officer shall detain in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the absence of a special order of a Magistrate under section 167, exceed twenty- four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate's Court.
Section 57, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 58 Person arrested not to be detained more than twenty-four hours Text carried over almost unchanged 95%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Marfing Tamang @ Maaina Tamang vs State (nct of Delhi)
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The word 'forthwith' appearing in Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, mandates that the grounds of arrest must be communicated to an arrestee immediately and simultaneously with the issuance of the arrest memo, not later within 24 hours. Any delay in communicating grounds of arrest, including communication during remand proceedings, violates the statutory requirement and the constitutional guarantee under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. The grounds of arrest must be reduced to writing and served upon the arrestee at the time of arrest itself, and the arrestee must be given meaningful opportunity to consult legal counsel after receiving such grounds before being subjected to remand proceedings.
On this section: Requirement to produce arrestee before Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest. Court noted this does not extend the time for communicating grounds of arrest.
-
Vishal Manohar Mandrekar vs The State of Telangana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Obtaining a transit warrant is mandatory for police to claim protection under Article 22(2) of the Constitution when arresting an accused outside the jurisdiction where the offence was registered. A subsequent remand order by a magistrate cannot legalize prior detention that violated Article 22(2) of the Constitution. The right under Article 22(2) is available against illegal detention by police, and if the prior detention is illegal, the accused is entitled to be released even if subsequently remanded to judicial custody by the magistrate. The police cannot claim the benefit of excluding journey time from the 24-hour period without obtaining a transit warrant.
On this section: Section 57 mandates that no police officer shall detain in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than reasonable, and such period shall not exceed 24 hours excluding time necessary for journey from place of arrest to Magistrate Court. The court held that this provision was violated as the petitioner was not produced within 24 hours and no transit warrant was obtained.
-
Sakil Ahmad vs State of Nct of Delhi
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an accused is remanded by a Magistrate under Section 167 of CrPC, the 60-day period for filing chargesheet must be calculated from the date of remand itself, including that day. If the chargesheet is filed on or after the 61st day, the accused acquires an indefeasible right to default bail which cannot be frustrated by the prosecution, regardless of the seriousness of the allegations. This right accrues automatically upon expiry of the 60-day period and protects personal liberty against prolonged custody due to investigative delays.
On this section: Mandates that accused be produced before Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest; establishes the foundational requirement for judicial scrutiny of police custody
-
Bhola Singh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the statutory period of 180 days (or 60/90 days as applicable) for filing charge-sheet expires without the charge-sheet being filed, an indefeasible right to default bail accrues to the accused. This right is computed by including the date of remand as the first day of the stipulated period. The date of remand cannot be excluded from this computation, as such exclusion would create a legal vacuum, violate personal liberty protections under the Constitution, and militate against the legislative intent of protecting accused from prolonged custody due to investigative delays. This right cannot be defeated by the prosecution filing the charge-sheet after the accused has offered to furnish bail.
On this section: Mandates that accused be produced before Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest. Cited to establish the continuity of custody from arrest to remand.
-
Ram Charitra Prasad& ANR. vs State of Bihar& ORS.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A criminal complaint can be quashed if it is found to be motivated by obvious considerations and lacks credibility, particularly when it appears to be filed to create a defense for an accused person rather than to seek genuine justice. The court will assess the motivation and credibility of the complaint based on the circumstances, including the relationship between the complainant and the accused, the nature of the allegations, and the availability of alternative remedies.
On this section: The court noted that if the son of the complainant had any grievance against the police officers, he could have made a statement in court when produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 57 CrPC, rather than the father filing a separate complaint.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… Admittedly, the applicants were detained without any authority, from the midnight of 20th July 1989 to 5.20 p.m. of 21st July 1989 — for 17 hours. Their arrest has been so recorded that their production before the Magistrate falls within 24 hours stipulated by Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India and section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The prosecution urges that after the ―arrest‖ they were not detained beyond 24 hours. This submission is a distortion of the true meaning of the constitutional <sup>11</sup> 1990 SCC OnLine Bom 3  (04 Feb 2025) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Requirement to produce arrestee before Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest. Court noted this does not extend the time for communicating grounds of arrest. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below. They run from 2011 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CRPC 57, section 57 CRPC, section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Marfing Tamang @ Maaina Tamang vs State (nct of Delhi) (04 Feb 2025).
What should I read with Section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 167 (Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 58 (Person arrested not to be detained more than twenty-four hours), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 57, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.