The court after surrender can send accused to custody police after that can apply for remand . There is no fix time to apply for same.

The police generally requests 15 days from the court. The court normally grants it unless there are are compelling circumstances warranting lesser days.

Regards 

After surrender to the court, the state would have to file in application take the accused in their custody for investigation purposesv and would have to mention the grounds for it In their application.

The court would have options such send the accused back to the judicial custody, grant bail or send the accused to police custody for a time which is clearly mentioned in the order. There is no fixed time for police custody and the same is decided as per the facts and circumstances of each case.

There is no time frame fixed.for filling application.

The court may.accept or reject the police request.

You can surender and seek bail from court

the Magistrate can refuse to detain him or direct his detention either in police custody or judicial custody. When once he directs judicial custody, there is no question of police remand for the simple reason that the conditions aforesaid are no more there.

The accused protested and on the basis of my judgment reported in Gian Singh v. State, (1981) 19 Delhi LT 168 : (1981 Cri LJ 7), contended that once the accused is remanded to judicial custody, he cannot be sent back again to police custody in connection with, or in continuation of, the same investigation. What was permissible after his remand to judicial custody was that the accused could, subject to his right to silence, be questioned by the police with the permission of the Magistrate in any place and manner which do not amount to custody in the police. Referring to Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, , I had further made it clear that police custody commences when a police officer arrests a person by actually touching or confining his body or when the accused submits to the custody by word or action or offers to give information leading to discovery. The learned Magistrate distinguished my decision by stating that the precise question before me in Gian Singh (supra) was whether the accused could be interrogated by the police while in judicial custody. And the aforesaid observations did not apply to the question before him. I do not consider that any such distinction could be made. He was further of the view that the accused has not so far been remanded to police custody even once and therefore it is not a case of sending him back of police custody after a stint in judicial custody. Earlier, the accused was remanded to judicial custody for a limited purpose; at that time neither the diaries were scrutinised, nor was the culpability of the accused deeply examined with a view to consider whether any remand to police custody was called for or not or any recovery could be made at the instance of the accused or not. The question of police remand on merits has arisen for the first time, He rejected the contention of the accused.

4. It was also urged by the accused before him that 15 days from the date of his arrest having expired, the accused cannot be remanded to police custody. The learned Magistrate rejected this contention as well.

5. He then directed that the accused be remanded to the police custody for a period of five days, but he shall be handed over to the police on July 4, 1981 and the period of remand shall be reckoned from that date. The order of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate is dated July 2, 1981, against which the present petition has been filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. praying that it be quashed.

6. The learned public prosecutor for the CBI contended that the police custody of the petitioner cannot being from the day he was arrested on June 17, 1981, by the police and there has been no custody of the petitioner with the CBI police when the petitioner was transferred from Amritsar to Delhi because soon after his arrival here, he was remanded to judicial custody for purposes of test identification, and they have had no time to interrogate him. I asked the learned public prosecutor under what other provision of law if not under Section 167, Cr.P.C. the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody even for the so-called limited purpose. He was unable to find any support for the procedure adopted by the learned Magistrate. Subject to certain safeguards, test identification can be held anywhere, even in the Jail, while the accused is in the police custody. Parade in the jail is preferred because there are few chances for an allegation that the witnesses had seen the accused beforehand and because an appropriate number of people can be made available to join the parade. But for that purpose alone, there is no need to remand him to judicial custody. Indeed there is no provision in the Codewhich lays down that for the purpose of investigation the detention of the accused in police custody is even essential, vide State v. Santokh Singh, AIR 1956 Madh B 130 : (1956 Cri LJ 619).

7. Section 167, Cr.P.C. does not confer power on a Magistrate to dispense with police custody but what it does is to empower him to extend such custody beyond what is permitted under Section 57 thereof. Reading these two sections together one can safely conclude that Section 167 comes into play only when (1) the accused is arrested without warrant and is detained by a police officer, (2) it appears that more than twenty-four hours will be needed for investigation, (3) there are grounds for believing that the accusation or information against him is well founded, and (4) the officer in charge of the police station or the investigating officer not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector forwards the accused before the Magistrate. When this happens, the Magistrate can refuse to detain him or direct his detention either in police custody or judicial custody. When once he directs judicial custody, there is no question of police remand for the simple reason that the conditions aforesaid are no more there.

1. police can ask for the remand of the accused by moving an application in this regard to the concerned court,

2. practically, at the time, the accused surrenders, concerned police is intimated and the concerned police official/IO immediately moves an application. however, PC depends upon the gravity of the offense

1. Grant of bail is always depending upon the discretion of the court which is though judicial and not capricious or based on whims or fancy of court.

2. At the time of applying for bail PP on behalf of the police can oppose bail and seek custody for investigate.

3. Hence in stead of apply in for bail u/s 437 crpc a, apply for anticipatory bail u/s 438 crpc first in sessions court and if it is rejected then apply in high court.

Hi

Since the accused voluntarily surrendered in court, it will be the discretion of the court either to send him to police custody or judicial custody.

More often than not, the police will ask for two weeks time depending on the magnitude of the offence, there is no fixed time frame.  Again it will be the discretion of the court.

Further, it will be the court's discretion to accept or reject the request of Police.

Depends on charges and police can ask for remand any time.

Once in judicial custody,  for investigation purpose, police can request remand any but for not more than 15 days.

Hello,

It depends on the section under which you have been booked. In most cases of your are absconded the court will not Grant you bail and if it does so then there would be high amount of security Bond.

Regards

- Surrender to court is just a safeguard provided by law against harrassment of police department and further depends upon judicial authorities whether to give JC to police officials or not 

- If police directly arrest a person than many times it is noted that police takes ita own time to follow prescribed procedure and may forcefully get the acknowledgement of crime.

- Better move an application for Surrender and simultaneously try for bail.

Regards

Vivek Arya

1. Police can certainly ask for police custody even if the proclaimed offender surrenders before the Court.

2. The police can ask PC for any period of time but the Court will decide about it. 

1. Police can cer tainly ask for PC for interrogation.

2. The Court will decide about the days to be allowed for PC.

Once the accused is surrendered before court under this provision then he will be remanded and sent to judicial custody.

The police may file a petition for taking him to their custody within one or two days.

A woman who was declared a proclaimed offender in a cheating case 19 years ago surrendered in court on Wednesday and was granted bail the same day.

Hence you can file a bail application at the same time while you  surrender before court to get enlarged on bail.

The accused can surrender before court and file an application for bail at the same time, get enlarged on bail.

The court may impose condition that the accused should cooperate with the police for investigation, in that case the police may not seek custody, but it will summon the accused to police station for investigation.

The police may request the court to hand over the accused to the police for questioning. The time may depend upon many factors.

- For surrender , an accused has to move application for the same before the Court , the Court accordingly inform the concerned police official generally.

- Hence, at the time of surrender , police official will move application for Police custody , and it is common practice to allow the same for at least 1-2 days. But , it is not mandatory.

- As a safeguard, the accused should move an application for Bail . Many cases are there , where Court grants bail to the accused , due to voluntarily surrender before the court.

- Dont try for Anticipatory Bail for a proclaimed offender , as higher court will not grant bail to a absonder in a criminal case.

The custody after proclamation Depends on sections under which the person has been declare as proclaimed.

Yes police can ask for custody of the accused if he has been declared proclaimed during the investigation of the case. But if he is declared proclaimed after investigation and during trial then he will be sent to JC.