(1) Whenever any person is arrested and detained in custody, and it appears that the investigation cannot be completed within the period of twenty-four hours fixed by section 57, and there are grounds for believing that the accusation or information is well- founded, the officer in charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation, if he is not below the rank of sub-inspector, shall forthwith transmit to the nearest Judicial Magistrate a copy of the entries in the diary hereinafter prescribed relating to the case, and shall at the same time forward the accused to such Magistrate.
(2) The Magistrate to whom an accused person is forwarded under this section may, whether he has or has not jurisdiction to try the case, from time to time, authorise the detention of the accused in such custody as such Magistrate thinks fit, for a term not exceeding fifteen days in the whole; and if he has no jurisdiction to try the case or commit it for trial, and considers further detention unnecessary, he may order the accused to be forwarded to a Magistrate having such jurisdiction:
Provided that—
1[(a) the Magistrate may authorise the detention of the accused person, otherwise than in custody of the police, beyond the period of fifteen days, if he is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for doing so, but no Magistrate shall authorise the detention of the accused person in custody under this paragraph for a total period exceeding—
(i) ninety days, where the investigation relates to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years;
(ii) sixty days, where the investigation relates to any other offence,
and, on the expiry of the said period of ninety days, or sixty days, as the case may be, the accused person shall be released on bail if he is prepared to and does furnish bail, and every person released on bail under this sub-section shall be deemed to be so released under the provisions of Chapter XXXIII for the purposes of that Chapter;]
2[(b) no Magistrate shall authorise detention of the accused in custody of the police under this section unless the accused is produced before him in person for the first time and subsequently every time till the accused remains in the custody of the police, but the Magistrate may extend further detention in judicial custody on production of the accused either in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage;]
(c) no Magistrate of the second class, not specially empowered in this behalf by the High Court, shall authorise detention in the custody of the police.
3[Explanation I.—For the avoidance of doubts, it is hereby declared that, notwithstanding the expiry of the period specified in paragraph (a), the accused shall be detained in custody so long as he does not furnish bail.]
4[Explanation II.—If any question arises whether an accused person was produced before the Magistrate as required under clause (b), the production of the accused person may be proved by his signature on the order authorising detention or by the order certified by the Magistrate as to production of the accused person through the medium of electronic video linkage, as the case may be.]
5[Provided further that in case of a woman under eighteen years of age, the detention shall be authorised to be in the custody of a remand home or recognised social institution.]
6[(2A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), the officer in charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation, if he is not below the rank of a sub-inspector, may, where a Judicial Magistrate is not available, transmit to the nearest Executive Magistrate, on whom the powers of a Judicial Magistrate or Metropolitan Magistrate have been conferred, a copy of the entry in the diary hereinafter prescribed relating to the case, and shall, at the same time, forward the accused to such Executive Magistrate, and thereupon such Executive Magistrate, may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, authorise the detention of the accused person in such custody as he may think fit for a term not exceeding seven days in the aggregate; and, on the expiry of the period of detention so authorised, the accused person shall be released on bail except where an order for further detention of the accused person has been made by a Magistrate competent to make such order; and, where an order for such further detention is made, the period during which the accused person was detained in custody under the orders made by an Executive Magistrate under this sub-section, shall be taken into account in computing the period specified in paragraph (a) of the proviso to sub-section (2):
Provided that before the expiry of the period aforesaid, the Executive Magistrate shall transmit to the nearest Judicial Magistrate the records of the case together with a copy of the entries in the diary relating to the case which was transmitted to him by the officer in charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation, as the case may be.]
(3) A Magistrate authorising under this section detention in the custody of the police shall record his reasons for so doing.
(4) Any Magistrate other than the Chief Judicial Magistrate making such order shall forward a copy of his order, with his reasons for making it, to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
(5) If in any case triable by a Magistrate as a summons-case, the investigation is not concluded within a period of six months from the date on which the accused was arrested, the Magistrate shall make an order stopping further investigation into the offence unless the officer making the investigation satisfies the Magistrate that for special reasons and in the interests of justice the continuation of the investigation beyond the period of six months is necessary.
(6) Where any order stopping further investigation into an offence has been made under sub-section (5), the Sessions Judge may, if he is satisfied, on an application made to him or otherwise, that further investigation into the offence ought to be made, vacate the order made under sub-section (5) and direct further investigation to be made into the offence subject to such directions with regard to bail and other matters as he may specify.
STATE AMENDMENT
Gujarat
In the proviso to sub-Section (2) of section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in its application to the State of Gujarat, —
(i) for paragraph (a), the following paragraph shall be substituted, namely: —
(a) the Magistrate may authorise detention of the accused person, otherwise than in the custody of the police, beyond the period of fifteen days, if he is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for doing so, but no Magistrate shall authorise the detention of the accused person in custody under this section for a total period exceeding—
(i) one hundred and twenty days, where the investigation relates to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years,
(ii) sixty days, where the investigation relates to any offence;
and, on the expiry of the said period of one hundred and twenty days, or sixty days, as the ease may be, the accused person shall be released on bail if he is prepared to and does furnish bail; and every person released on bail under this section shall be deemed to be so released under the provisions of Chapter XXXIII for the purposes of that Chapter;
(ii) in paragraph (b), for the words “no Magistrate shall” the words “no Magistrate shall, except for reason to be recorded in writing” shall be substituted;
(iii) the Explanation shall be numbered as Explanation II, and before Explanation II as so numbered, the following Explanation shall be inserted, namely: —
Explanation I. —For the avoidance of doubts, it is hereby declared that, notwithstanding the expiry of the period specified in paragraph (a), the accused person shall be detained in custody so long as he does not furnish bail.
Amendment to apply to pending investigation.—The provisions of section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as amended by this Act, shall apply to every investigation pending immediately before the commencement of this Act, if the period of detention of the accused person, otherwise than in the custody of the police, authorised under that section, had not, at such commencement, exceeded sixty days.]
[Vide Gujarat Act 21 of 1976, s. 2 & 3]
Gujarat
In Section 167, in sub-section (2) : —
(1) in the proviso, for paragraph (b), the following paragraph shall be substituted, namely: — “(b) no Magistrate shall authorise further detention in any custody under this section unless—
(i) where the accused is in the custody of police, he is produced in person before the Magistrate, and
(ii) where the accused is otherwise than in the custody of the police, he is produced before the Magistrate either in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage, in accordance with the direction of the Magistrate.”;
(2) in Explanation II, after the words “ whether an accused person was produced before the Magistrate”, the words “in person or, as the case may be, through the medium of electronic video linkage” shall be inserted.
[Vide Gujarat Act 31 of 2003, s. 2.]
Chhattisgarh
(1) In clause (b) of Sub-Section (2) of Section 167 of the principal Act, for the word “any” the word “police” shall be substituted.
(2) After clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the Principal Act, the following new sub-clause (bb) shall be added, namely:—
“(bb) No magistrate shall authorise detention of the accused person other than in the custody of the police under this section unless the accused is produced before him either in person of through the medium of electronic video linkage and represented by his pleader in the Court.”
(3) In explanation II, after words “was produced” the word “from police custody” shall be added.
(4) After explanation II, the following new explanation shall be added:-
“III. If any question arises whether an accused person was produced from otherwise than in the custody of the police in person or (as the case may be) through medium of electronic video linkage before the Magistrate as required under paragraph (bb), the production of the accused person may be proved by his or his pleader’s signature on the order authorising detention.”
[Vide Chhattisgarh Act 13 of 2006, sec. 3]
Union territories of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Lakshadweep
In section 167,—
(i) in sub-section (1) after the words “nearest Judicial Magistrate” the words “or, if there is no Judicial Magistrate in an island, to an Executive Magistrate functioning in that island” shall be inserted;
(ii) after sub-section (1), the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely:—
“(1A) Where a copy of the entries in diary is transmitted to an Executive Magistrate, reference in section 167 to a Magistrate shall be construed as references to such Executive Magistrate;”
(iii) to sub-section (3), the following proviso shall be added, namely:—
“Provided that no Executive Magistrate other than the District Magistrate or Sub-divisional Magistrate, shall unless he is specially empowered in this behalf by the State Government, authorise detention in the custody of the police.”
(iv) to sub-section (4), the following proviso shall be added, namely:—
“Provided that, where such order is made by an Executive Magistrate, the Magistrate making the order shall forward a copy of the order, with his reasons for making it, to the Executive Magistrate to whom he is immediately subordinate.”
[Vide The Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Regulation, 1974 Act (1 of 1974), s. 5.]
Maharashtra
Amendment of section 167. — In Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (2 of 1974) in its application to the State of Maharashtra,—
(a) in sub-section (2) in the proviso, for paragraph (b), the following paragraph shall be substituted, namely:—
(b) no Magistrate shall authorise detention in any custody, of the accused person under this section unless, the accused person is produced before him in person, and for any extension of custody otherwise than the extension in the police custody, the accused person may be produced either in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage.” ;
(b) in Explanation II, for the words “an accused person was produced”, the words “an accused person was produced in person or as the case may be, through the medium of electronic video linkage” shall be substituted.
[Vide Maharashtra Act 8 of 2005, s. 2]
Madhya Pradesh
Amendment of Section 167.—In sub-section (2) of section 167 of the principal Act,— (i) in the proviso, for paragraph (b), the following paragraph shall be substituted, namely: —
“(b) no magistrate shall authorise detention in any custody under this section unless the accused is produced before him in person for the first time and subsequently every time till such time the accused remains in the custody of police, but the Magistrate may extend further detention in judicial custody on production of accused either in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage;”;
(ii) for Explanation II, the following Explanation shall be substituted, namely:—
“Explanation II.—If any question arise whether an accused person was produced before the Magistrate as required under paragraph (b), the production of the accused person may be proved by his signature on the order authorising detention or by the order certified by the Magistrate as to production of the accused person through the medium of electronic video linkage, as the case may be.”.
[Vide Madhya Pradesh Act 2 of 2008, s. 3.]
West Bengal
In section 167 of the principal Act,—
(a) In Section 167 of sub-section (5), the following sub-section shall be substituted:— “(5) If, in respect of—
(i) any case triable by a Magistrate as a summons case, the investigation is not concluded within a period of six months, or
(ii) any case exclusively triable by a Court of Session or a case under Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), the investigation is not concluded within a period of three years, or
(iii) any case other than those mentioned in clauses (i) and (ii), the investigation is not concluded within a period of two years, from the date on which the accused was arrested or made his appearance, the Magistrate shall make an order stopping further investigation into the offence and shall discharge the accused unless the officer making the investigation satisfies the Magistrate that for special reasons and in the interests of justice the continuation of the investigation beyond the periods mentioned in this sub-section is necessary.”;
(b) in sub-section (6), after the “words any order stopping further investigation into an offence has been made” the words “and the accused has been discharged” shall be inserted.
[Vide West Bengal Act 24 of 1988, s. 4.]
West Bengal
Amendment of section 167.- In the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 167 of the principal Act, for clause (b), the following clause shall be substituted:—
“(b) no Magistrate shall authorize detention under this section—
(i) in the police custody, unless the accused is produced before him in person every time till the accused is in police custody;
(ii) in the judicial custody, unless the accused is produced before him either in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage;”.
[Vide West Bengal Act 20 of 2004, s. 3.]
Assam
In Section 167 of the Code:—
(a) in sub-section (i) the reference to “Judicial Magistrate” shall be construed as reference also to executive Magistrate;
(b) in sub-section (2):—
(i) for the word “Magistrate” at the first two places where that word is preceded by the definite article, the words “Judicial Magistrate or the Executive Magistrate, as the case may be,” shall be substituted;
(ii) for the word “Magistrate”, at the place where that word is preceded by the indefinite article “a”, the words and brackets “Magistrate (whether Judicial or Executive)” shall be substituted;
(iii) paragraph (c) of the proviso shall be omitted;
(c) Sub-section (2A) shall be omitted:—
(d) in sub-section (4), for the words “to the Chief Judicial Magistrate,” the words “where such Magistrate is a Judicial Magistrate, to the Chief Judicial Magistrate and where such Magistrate is an Executive Magistrate to the Session Judge” shall be substituted.
[Vide Assam Act 3 of 1984, s. 3(3) and the Schedule.]
Delhi
In its application to the State of Delhi, in section 167, in sub-section (2):—
(i) for clause (b), substitute the following clause, namely:—
“(b) no Magistrate shall authorise detention in any custody under this section unless the accused is produced before him either in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage:
Provided that if the accused is in police custody, no Magistrate shall authorise his detention in any custody unless the accused is produced before him in person;”
(ii) for the Explanation II thereunder, substitute the following Explanation, namely:—
“Explanation II. - If any question arises whether an accused person was produced in person or, as the case may be, through the medium of electronic video linkage before the magistrate as required under paragraph (b), the production of the accused person may be proved by his signature on the order authorising his detention or by video recording of the proceedings, as the case may be.”.
[Vide Delhi Act 4 of 2004, s. 2 (w.e.f. 16-8-2004).]
Orissa
Amendment of section 167.—In the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),-
(i) for paragraph (b), the following paragraph shall be substituted, namely:—
“(b) no Magistrate shall authorize detention of the accused in custody of the police under this section unless the accused in produced before him in person for the first time and subsequently every time till the accused remains in the custody of the police, but the Magistrate may extend further detention in Judicial custody on production of the accused either in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage;”, and
(ii) for Explanation II, the following Explanation shall be substituted, namely:—
“Explanation II— If any question arises whether an accused person was produced before the Magistrate as required under paragraph (b), the production of the accused person may be proved by his signature on the order authorizing detention or by the order certified by the Magistrate as to production of the accused person through the medium of electronic video linkage, as the case may be.”.
[Vide Orissa Act 16 of 2009, s. 2]
Amendment of section 167.— In section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in paragraph (a) of the proviso to sub-section (2),—
(i) For the words “under this paragraph” the words “under this section” shall be substituted; and
(ii) For the words “ninety days” wherever they occur, the words “ one hundred and twenty days” shall be substituted.
[Vide Orissa Act 11 of 1997, s. 2]
Andhra Pradesh and Telangana
Amendment of section 167, Central Act (2 of 1974).-In the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in section 167 in its application to the State of Andhra Pradesh, in sub-section (2),-
(i) to clause (b), the following shall be added at the end, namely:-
“either in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage:”;
(ii) in the Explanation II thereunder, for the words “an accused person was produced”, the words “an accused person was produced in person or as the case may be through the medium of electronic video linkage” shall be substituted.
[Vide Andhra Pradesh Act 31 of 2001, s. 2]
Manipur
In section 167 of the Code, after sub-section (6), the following sub-section shall be added, namely:--
“(7) A specified Executive Magistrate shall, to the exclusion of any other Magistrate, have power to authorise detention under this section of any person accused of any offences specified in clause (a) of subsection (1) of section 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Manipur Second Amendment) Act, 1984 and as respects those offences,--
(i) the reference in the foregoing sub-sections to a Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate shall b construed as reference to a Specified Executive Magistrate;
(ii) paragraph (c) of the proviso to sub-section (2) shall be deemed to have been omitted;
(iii) sub-section (2A) shall be deemed to have been omitted;
(iv) the words “other than the Chief Judicial Magistrate” in sub-section 4, shall be deemed to have been omitted and for the words “to the Chief Judicial Magistrate” in that sub-section, the words “to the Sessions Judge” shall be deemed to have been substituted.”.
[Vide Manipur Act 3 of 1985, s. 4(2) and the Schedule]
Meghalaya
Amendment of Section 167 of the Code.—In section 167 of the Code—
(a) in sub-section (1)
(i) for the words “nearest Judicial Magistrate” the words “Deputy Commissioner or Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner” shall be substituted.
(ii) for the words “such Magistrate” occurring at the end, the word “him” shall be substituted.
(b) in sub-section (2), for the word “Magistrate” occurring at the beginning, the words “Deputy Commissioner” and for the words “such Magistrate occurring between the words “as” and ‘thinks’ the word “he” shall substituted.
(c) in the provisos (a), (b) and the explanation below proviso (c), to sub-section (2) for the word “Magistrate” wherever it occurs the words “Deputy Commissioner or Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner shall substituted.
(d) in the proviso (c) to sub-section (2), for the word “Magistrate” the words “Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner” shall be substituted.
(e) In sub-section (3), for the words “A Magistrate” the words “Deputy Commissioner or Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner” shall be substituted.
(f) that for sub-section (4), the following shall be substituted, namely—
“(4) Any Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner making such order shall forward a copy of his order, with his reasons for making it, to the Deputy Commissioner.”
(g) in sub-section (5), for the words “a Magistrate” occurring at the beginning and “Magistrate” occurring elsewhere, the words “an Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner” and “Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner” respectively shall be substituted.
(h) in sub-section (6) for the words “Sessions Judge” the words “Deputy Commissioner” shall be substituted.
[Vide Meghalaya Act 4 of 1988, s. 4]