As per section 460 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to confine the prisoner in a jail,…

Under section 460 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly section 420 CrPC), the warrant is lodged with the jailor when the prisoner is to be confined in jail. This places the authority for confinement with the officer responsible for the place of detention, rather than confusing the court's act of issuing the warrant with its required destination.

Why not "court which passed the sentence of imprisonment."? The sentencing court is responsible for judicially imposing the sentence and forwarding the necessary authority, but the warrant for confinement is lodged with the jailor. Keeping the relevant warrant solely at the sentencing court would not answer the statutory question about where it must be lodged.

Why not "district & sessions judge of the concerned jurisdiction."? The District and Sessions Judge's judicial position does not make that judge the designated recipient for lodging this jail-confinement warrant. The provision addresses the custody of the warrant at the place where the prisoner is confined, and expressly identifies the jailor for that purpose.

Why not "office of the Commissioner of Police of the concerned jurisdiction."? The Police Commissioner's office is not the destination specified for lodging the warrant authorizing confinement in jail. Police involvement in arrest or transport is distinct from the jailor's responsibility for confinement, so the named police office cannot replace the statutory recipient of the warrant.