24-hour arrest clock starts from detention, not formal arrest record: Supreme Court

Mangalore Today News Network

New Delhi, Nov 5, 2026: The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the 24-hour constitutional deadline for producing an arrested person before a magistrate begins from the moment the person’s liberty is curtailed through detention, and not from the time the police formally record the arrest.

A bench comprising Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S Chandurkar held that making an artificial distinction between ’arrest’ and ’detention’ is inconsistent with the Constitution.

The court observed that the interpretation that the 24-hour period begins only after formal arrest goes against Article 22(2) of the Constitution and Section 56 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

Referring to Article 22(2), the bench pointed out that the provision covers every person who is arrested and detained in custody. The two expressions must be read together, as the Constitution does not recognise detention as a separate period independent of arrest.

"An artificial distinction between ’arrest’ and ’detention’ would be highly problematic. If we venture into such semantics, the question will naturally arise as to who will determine what a short investigative period is," the bench observed.

The court clarified that the only permissible exclusion from the 24-hour period is the time reasonably required to travel from the place of arrest to the magistrate’s court. Time spent on preliminary inquiries or investigations before formal arrest cannot be excluded.

The ruling came while hearing appeals filed by four persons who were denied bail by the Tripura High Court in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act involving the seizure of 11.03 kg of yaba tablets.

The accused were detained at around 2 pm on September 29, 2025, during a search and seizure operation. However, their formal arrest was recorded only at 11 am the following day.

The Supreme Court held that they should have been produced before a magistrate within 24 hours of their initial detention. Keeping them in custody for approximately 18 hours without judicial oversight violated the constitutional safeguard under Article 22(2), it ruled.

The bench also disapproved of earlier rulings by the Orissa, Kerala and Madras High Courts that permitted the exclusion of periods of detention before formal arrest, holding that those decisions did not lay down the correct law.

However, it approved the Kerala High Court’s view in the Biswajith Mandal case that the 24-hour period begins when a person’s liberty is effectively curtailed.

The Supreme Court directed magistrates to record the actual date and time of detention whenever an accused person is produced before them and verify whether the 24-hour deadline has been followed.

If the deadline is violated, the person must be released immediately, the court said. It further directed magistrates to examine whether the detention was reasonable even when it remained within the stipulated 24-hour period. If the detention is found excessive under the circumstances, the magistrate can refuse remand.

Orders immediate release

The Supreme Court ordered the immediate release of the four appellants, stressing that concerns over custodial violence make effective judicial oversight of detention essential.

The bench reiterated that detention beyond 24 hours without production before a magistrate warrants immediate release. It also said authorities must ensure that custody does not continue beyond a reasonable period within the 24-hour limit, as required under Section 58 of the BNSS.

The Tripura High Court had earlier rejected the accused’s procedural challenge and applied the stringent twin conditions for bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, observing that prolonged incarceration alone could not override the statutory restrictions.