(..8..)

INFORMATION TO THE POLICE AND THEIR POWERS TO INVESTIGATE

Table of Contents

(Ss. 154 TO 176)

QUESTION BANK

Q.1. What is meant by F.I.R.? State the importance and evidentiary value of F.I.R.

Q.2. What is F.I.R? how it is recorded? What procedure you should follow when it is rejected by the police in charge of police station?

Q.3. What is F.I.R? State the procedure and importance of FIR and its evidentiary value.

Q.4. What is F.I.R? Give a brief account of the powers of the police to investigate.

Q.5. What is difference between F.I.R and Complaint? What are essential of filing a complaint?

SHORT NOTES

First Information Report.

SYNOPSIS

A) INFORMATION TO POLICE: –
INFORMATION IN COGNIZABLE CASES/ FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (F.I.R): –
a) Definition: –
c) Object of the F.I.R.: –
d) Importance of F.I.R.: –
e) Evidentiary value of F.I.R.: –
f) Delay in lodging F.I.R. : –
g) Distinction between “F.I.R.” and “Complaint”: – (refer topic of “Definitions”)
INFORMATION IN NON-COGNIZABLE CASES (S. 155): –

III. INFORMATION IN THE CASES OF UNNATURAL DEATHS (S. 174): –

B) INVESTIGATION BY POLICE: –
I) INVESTIGATION IN COGNIZABLE OFFENCES (Ss. 156 to 159): –

1) Police Officers’ power to investigate cognizable case (S. 156): –

2) Procedure of investigation (S. 157): –

3) Report how submitted (S. 158): –

INVESTIGATION IN NON-COGNIZABLE CASES (S. 155): –
C) PROVISIONS AS TO INVESTIGATION: –
POLICE OFFICERS POWERS TO REQUIRE ATTENDANCE AND EXAMINATION OF WITNESS AND RECORDING STATEMENTS (Ss. 160 to 163)

1) Police officer’s power to require attendance of witnesses (S. 160): –

2) Examination of witness by police (S. 161 & 163): –

3) Statement to the police and the use of such statements in evidence (S. 162): –

Evidentiary value of the statement: –

STATEMENTS AND CONFESSIONS TO MAGISTRATE DURING INVESTIGATION (S. 164): –

III. PROVISIONS AS TO SEARCH (Discussed in separate topic): –

PROCEDURE WHEN INVESTIGATION CANNOT BE COMPLETED WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR HOURS (S. 167): –
A) Provisions as to Remand: –
a) Remand by Judicial Magistrate: –
b) Remand by Executive Magistrate: –
B) Remand to police custody: –
C) Maximum period of detention and right to bail: –
D) No Remand in police custody without production of accused before Magistrate:
E) If in summons case investigation not completed within six months: –
PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED ON COMPLETION OF INVESTIGATION: –

(1) Release of accused when evidence is deficient (S. 169): –

(2) Cases to be sent to Magistrate when evidence is sufficient (S. 170): –

(3) Complainant and witnesses need not be accompanied (S. 171): –

(4) Report of police on completion of investigation (S. 173): –

D) INVESTIGATIONS AND INQUIRIES INTO THE CASES OF UNNATURAL DEATHS, SUICIDES ETC (Ss. 174 to 176): –

NOTE

1) POLICE DIARY (S. 172): –

This chapter deals with the information (of a crime) to police and the powers of the police to investigate 1) Cognizable offences (S. 154), (2) non-cognizable offences (S. 155), (3) suicide or killing of a man by an animal, etc. (S. 174). It is clear from the above statement that this topic is broadly divided into two parts, viz. (1) Information to the police (of above-mentioned offences) and (2) Powers of the police to investigate them. We will discuss them one by one.

A) INFORMATION TO POLICE: –

I. INFORMATION IN COGNIZABLE CASES/ FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (F.I.R): –

a) Definition: –

The First Information Report (FIR) has not been defined in the Code. However, it may be defined as follows-

(1) it is information given to the police officer.

(2) Information must relate to a cognizable offence[1],

(3) It is information first in point of time,

(4) On the basis of this information, the investigation into the offence commences.

In other words, information to the police of a cognizable offence given first in point of time is the first information report.

b) Manner and form of recording F.I.R. (S. 154): –

All information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence is to be given to the officer in charge of a police station. The information so received shall be recorded in the following manner by the police-

1) If the information is given orally- it shall be reduced to writing by the officer himself or under his direction (by someone else).

2) If the information is given in writing or reduced into writing (as aforesaid), the writing shall be read to the informant.

3) The informant then shall sign that writing.

4) The police officer shall then enter the substance of the information in a book to be kept in the form prescribed by the State Government, which is known as a station diary or General diary.

5) The informant must be supplied with a copy of the information recorded as above forthwith, free of cost.

6) If the Officer-in-charge of a police station refuses to record the information, the person aggrieved by such refusal may send by post the substance of the information to the Superintendent of Police. If he is satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, he shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer.

This information, as recorded in the manner prescribed by S. 154, is referred to as the first information report or F.I.R.

c) Object of the F.I.R.: –

The object of the F.I.R. is as follows-

1) To acquaint the Court before (i) whom the application for bail is to be considered and or the accused is tried. Moreover, to acquit the court with the facts given out immediately after the occurrence and the material on the basis of which the investigation commences.

2) To safeguard the interests of the accused against subsequent additions, etc.

3) To set the criminal law into motion, i.e., to set investigation machinery into motion.

4) To obtain information about the alleged criminal activity so as to be able to take suitable steps for tracing and bringing on record the guilty person.

d) Importance of F.I.R.: –

F.I.R. is important from many points of view. It is very important to corroborate the evidence at the trial. The object behind it is to obtain early information on the circumstances in which the crime was committed. The object is to record the circumstances before there is time for them to be forgotten or embellished. It is the record of the earliest information of an offence.

A message sent by telephone to the police officer and recorded by him in his station diary, which discloses information regarding a cognizable office, is F.I.R. A cryptic and anonymous telephone message, which did not clearly specify a cognizable office, cannot be reacted as an F.I.R.

e) Evidentiary value of F.I.R.: –

It is a settled law that F.I.R. is not substantive evidence. It can only be used as evidence if the maker of it is examined in court. It can be used to corroborate or contradict the maker. Its value depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. However, it cannot be used to corroborate or contradict witnesses other than the informant.

f) Delay in lodging F.I.R.: –

No law prescribes any limitation period for filing the first information report. Mere delay in lodging F.I.R. cannot be grounds for throwing away the prosecution’s case. However, the long, unexplained delay may create doubt or suspicion about the incident. In such cases, there is the likeliness of consultations, deliberations, and even false implications for the accused.

g) Distinction between “F.I.R.” and “Complaint”: – (refer to the topic of “Definitions”)

II. INFORMATION IN NON-COGNIZABLE CASES (S. 155): –

155 provides that when information is given to an Officer-in-charge of a police station about the commission of a non-cognizable offence, he should enter the substance of such information in the prescribed book and refer the information to the Magistrate. The officer-in-charge of a police station, however, cannot investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of the Magistrate having the power to try such a case or commit the case for trial. But if the case is related to two or more offences one of which is a cognizable offence, it shall be deemed to be a cognizable case.

III. INFORMATION IN THE CASES OF UNNATURAL DEATHS (S. 174): –

It provides that when the Officer-in-charge of a police station receives information that a person-

1) has committed suicide; or

2) has been killed by another, or by an animal, or by machinery, or by accident; or

3) has died under such circumstances, raising a reasonable suspicion that some other person has committed an offence,

-he shall immediately intimate the nearest Executive Magistrate empowered to hold inquests and shall proceed to the place where the dead body is lying. In the presence of two or more respectable inhabitants of the neighbourhood, he must investigate and report the apparent cause of death. The report must describe wounds, fractures, bruises, and marks of injury as may be found on the body and state in what manner or by what weapon or instrument such marks appear to have been inflicted. The officer-in-charge of a police station should sign such a report and get it signed by the other persons who concur with him. Then, the officer should forward it to the District Magistrate or the Sub-Divisional Magistrate.

In the following circumstances, the police officer will forward the dead body for medical examination (post-mortem) to the nearest Civil Surgeon – viz.

i) the case involves suicide by a woman within seven years of her marriage or
ii) the case relates to the death of a woman within seven years of her marriage committed an offence in relation to such woman; or

iii) the case relates to the death of a woman within seven years of her marriage, and any relative of the woman has made a request on that behalf or

iv) there is any doubt regarding the cause of death; or
v) the police officer, for any other reason, considers it expedient to do so.

The report prepared by the police officer under this section is called an “inquest report”. The object of this section is to ascertain whether a person has died under suspicious circumstances or was an unnatural death, and if so, what is the apparent cause of the death.

B) INVESTIGATION BY POLICE: –

I) INVESTIGATION IN COGNIZABLE OFFENCES (Ss. 156 to 159): –

1) Police Officers’ power to investigate the cognizable cases (S. 156): –

This section empowers the Officer-in-charge of a police station to investigate any cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate. It further states that if the police do not investigate the complaint, the Magistrate can order the investigation.

When the information regarding a non-cognizable offence is given to the Officer-in-charge of a police station, he shall enter or cause to enter the substance of the information in a book kept for that purpose and refer the information to the Magistrate.

2) Procedure of investigation (S. 157): –

It provides how the investigation is to be conducted. If from information received or otherwise, an Officer-in-charge of a police station has reason to suspect the commission of a cognizable offence, he must forthwith send a report of the same to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance upon a police report and shall proceed in person or depute one of his subordinates to investigate the facts and circumstances of the case and to take steps for the discovery and arrest of the offender.

Suppose an officer in charge of a police station does not believe that there are reasonable grounds for investigation after recording his reasons. In that case, he shall notify the information that he will not investigate the case or cause it to be investigated.

Similarly, the proviso enables the officer not to investigate the case on the spot if the information is given against any person by name, the case is not of a serious nature, or there is no sufficient ground for such investigation.

[2]However, in relation to an offence of rape, the recording of the statement of the victim shall be conducted at the residence of the victim or in a place of her choice and as far as practicable by a woman police officer in the presence of her parents or guardian or near relatives or social worker of the locality.

3) Report how submitted (S. 158): –

The report that the Officer-in-charge of the police station sends of a cognizable offence to the Magistrate (under S.157) is called an “occurrence report”. Such a report may be sent to the Magistrate through a superior police officer. Such an officer may give necessary directions for the investigation to the officer in charge of a police station. The main object of this report is to enable a Magistrate to have early information on every serious crime so that he may be able to issue necessary directions under S. 159.

4) Power to direct investigation or to hold preliminary inquiry (S. 159): –

Magistrate, after receiving the above-mentioned report under S. 157, may (i) direct investigation, or (ii) proceed to hold a preliminary inquiry himself, or (iii) depute subordinate Magistrate to do so, or (iv) otherwise dispose of the case.

II. INVESTIGATION IN NON-COGNIZABLE CASES (S. 155): –

This section deals with information relating to a non-cognizable offence. No police officer can investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a competent Magistrate. However, once the police officer is permitted to investigate a non-cognizable case, he can exercise the same powers as being exercised with respect to a cognizable case, except that he cannot arrest any person without a warrant.

C) PROVISIONS AS TO INVESTIGATION: –

I. POLICE OFFICERS POWERS TO REQUIRE ATTENDANCE AND EXAMINATION OF WITNESS AND RECORDING STATEMENTS (Ss. 160 to 163)

The rules as to investigation into cognizable and non-cognizable cases are the same, except that investigation into the non-cognizable cases can be made by the police only under the order of the Magistrate. Once the police officer is permitted to investigate a non-cognizable case by the magistrate, he (the police officer) can exercise the same powers as with respect to a cognizable case[3].

1) Police officer’s power to require the attendance of witnesses (S. 160): –

A police officer making an investigation may, by written order, require the attendance before him of persons acquainted with the facts and the circumstances of the case, but no male person under the age of fifteen years or woman shall be required to attend at any place other than his or her place of residence.

2) Examination of witnesses by police (S. 161 & 163): –

A police officer can question such a person orally, and he is bound to answer truly all questions put to him relating to the case unless the answers to the question have a tendency to expose him to a criminal charge or a penalty of forfeiture. Such a statement can also be reduced to writing by the police officer. The police officer shall make a separate and true record of the statements of each such person whose statement he records. [4]Provided that the statement made under this section may also be recorded by audio-video electronic means.

Any person who refuses to obey such an order may be prosecuted under s. 174 of the I.P.C., but no inducement or threat shall be offered to the person making the statement, nor shall they be prevented by caution from making them (S. 163).

The examination under this section is not judicial and aims to obtain preliminary evidence for arrest.

3) Statement to the police and the use of such statements in evidence (S. 162): –

A statement made by any person to a police officer in the course of the investigation, if reduced into writing, shall be signed by the maker, nor shall any such statement or any record thereof, whether in police diary or otherwise, or any part thereof be used for any purpose at any inquiry or trial in respect of any offence under investigation at the time when such statement was made.

Ss. 160 and 161 empower the police to examine witnesses in the course of the investigation and to record their statements if they so desire. It is to avoid the situation that the accused may not be prejudiced in any way by the improper use of such statements recorded inaccurately by the police; S. 162 clearly lays down the mode and the purpose for which the statements may be used in evidence. The object is to protect the accused both against overzealous police officers and untruthful witnesses.[5].

Evidentiary value of the statement: –

A statement cannot be used for any other purpose except to contradict a prosecution witness by the Defence Council. A statement of a witness recorded by the police during an investigation cannot be used to seek assurance for the prosecution story. They cannot be used to seek corroboration or assurance for the testimony of the witness in court. The contents of statements of witnesses recorded by the police cannot be taken into consideration to find corroboration of the statements made in the court by either party. It cannot be used to contradict a defence witness or a court witness. A material contradiction between the court version of a witness and his previous statement made to the police merits careful consideration in determining whether the witness is truthful and reliable.

II. STATEMENTS AND CONFESSIONS TO MAGISTRATE DURING INVESTIGATION (S. 164): –

Any confession[6] made to a police officer is totally inadmissible in evidence. Even the statement recorded by the police in the course of the investigation cannot be used for any purpose other than those mentioned in S. 162 of the Code. This is because the police are not considered trustworthy, and there is always the likelihood of police threatening the accused and witnesses for extorting confessions and statements.

164, therefore, lays down the following formalities to be observed by the Magistrate while recording confession-
i) Before recording a confession, the Magistrate explains to the person making it-
a) that he is not bound to make it; and
b) if he makes it, it may be used in evidence against him.
ii) The Magistrate does not record it unless, upon questioning the person making it, he has reason to believe that it was voluntarily made.

iii) it should be recorded in the manner provided under S. 281[7]

iv) the Magistrate makes a memorandum at the foot of the record that he has explained to the accused that-

(1) he is not bound to make a confession;

(2) it may be used in evidence against him;

(3) it was voluntarily made;

(4) it was taken in his presence and hearing;

(5) it was read over to him;

(6) it was admitted by him to be correct;

(7) it contained a full and true account of the statement made by him.

(v) Such statements or confessions shall then be forwarded to the Magistrate by whom the case is to be inquired into or tried.

If, at any time before the confession has been recorded in writing, the person appearing before the Magistrate states that he is not willing to confess, the Magistrate shall not authorise his detention in police custody.

[8]The statement recorded under this section may also be recorded by audio-video electronic means in the presence of the advocate of the person accused of an offence.

III. PROVISIONS AS TO SEARCH (Discussed in a separate topic): –

PROCEDURE WHEN INVESTIGATION CAN NOT BE COMPLETED WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR HOURS (S. 167): –

A) Provisions as to Remand: –

a) Remand by Judicial Magistrate: –

167 of the Code provides a procedure when the investigation of an offence cannot be completed within twenty-four hours of the accused’s arrest. The section is supplementary to S. 57[9], which provides that the police cannot detain a person arrested without a warrant for more than twenty-four hours. If the investigation is not completed within twenty-four hours and the police consider detention of such person necessary, it must follow the procedure under this section.

Whenever-

(i) any person is arrested and detained in custody, and

(ii) it appears that the investigation cannot be completed within twenty-four hours, and

(iii) there are grounds to believe that the accusation or information is well-founded,

(iv) The officer-in-charge of a police station or the police officer making an investigation (not below the rank of sub-inspector) shall

forthwith transmit to the nearest Judicial Magistrate a copy of the entries in his diary and also

(b) forward the accused (S. 167 (1)).

In other words, if an investigation is not completed within 24 hours (as provided under S. 57 of the Code). The police officer requires that the accused should remain in his custody beyond such period (of 24 hours); he shall, under such circumstances, obtain an order from a Magistrate authorizing further detention of the accused in custody. Such an order is known as an ‘order of remand to custody’. The magistrate sends him on remand. There are two types of remands, viz. (i) Remand to Police and (ii) Remand to judicial lock-up. Remand to judicial custody is again of two types, viz. (1) Remand during investigation (which is regulated by S, 167), (2) Remand after investigation (which is regulated by S. 309). There is no provision for police custody in remand after the investigation is over (under S. 309).

b) Remand by Executive Magistrate: –

Where a Judicial Magistrate is not available, an Executive Magistrate (on whom the powers of a Judicial Magistrate or Metropolitan Magistrate have been conferred) may, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, authorise the detention of an accused for not exceeding seven days. Before the expiry of the custody period (i.e., seven days or less), the executive Magistrate shall transmit to the nearest Judicial Magistrate the records of the case with a copy of entries in the case diary transmitted to him by the Officer-in-charge of a police station (or by the police station or by the police officer making investigation). Where an order of further detention is necessary, a competent Magistrate (S) can pass it. 167 (2 A).

B) Remand to police custody: –

When an accused is presented before the Magistrate, he authorizes the detention of the accused in such custody (police or Magistrate’s, i.e., judicial) as he thinks fit for a term not exceeding fifteen days in the whole. (If the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to try the case or commit it for trial and considers further detention unnecessary, he may forward the accused to a Magistrate having jurisdiction).

If a Magistrate authorizes the detention of an accused in police custody, he shall record his reasons, and if he is not a Chief Judicial Magistrate, he shall forward a copy of his order, with his reasons for it, to the Chief Judicial Magistrate (S. 167 (4)). However, a second-class magistrate, who is not specially empowered on this behalf by the state government, cannot authorise detention in police custody (S. 167 (c).

C) Maximum period of detention and right to bail: –

The Magistrate may authorize the detention of an accused (otherwise than in the custody of the police) beyond fifteen days if he is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for doing so. Such detention, however, cannot exceed (i) ninety days, where the investigation relates to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term not less than ten years, and (ii) sixty days, where the investigation relates to any other offence.

Right to Bail: – After the expiry of ninety or sixty days, as the case may be, the accused shall be released on bail if he is prepared to furnish bail and the charge sheet is not filed. If he is not ready and willing to furnish bail, he will not be so released (Exp. I to Prov. (c)).

D) No Remand in police custody without production of accused before Magistrate: –

No Magistrate shall authorise detention in any custody of the police 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. Still, the Magistrate may extend further detention in judicial custody on the production of an accused in person or through electronic video linkage (S. 167 (2 b). Is there any question about whether the accused person was produced before the Magistrate? His signature may prove the production of the accused person on the order of detention or by the order certified by the Magistrate as to the production of the accused person through the medium of electronic video linkage. (S. 167 (2 Proviso Exp. II). However, in the case of a woman under eighteen years of age, the detention shall be authorised in the custody of a remand home or recognized social institution.

E) If in a summons case, an investigation is not completed within six months: –

Suppose a case is triable by a Magistrate as a summons case, and the investigation is not completed within six months from the accused’s arrest date. In that case, the Magistrate shall pass an order stopping the investigation unless the investigating officer satisfies the Magistrate that further continuation of the investigation is necessary for special reasons and in the interest of justice (S. 167 (5)).

If the Magistrate stops the investigation in the above case, the Sessions Judge may vacate the order, stop the investigation, and direct further investigation if he is satisfied that further investigation ought to be made (S. 167 (6)).

V. PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED ON COMPLETION OF INVESTIGATION: –

(1) Release of accused when evidence is deficient (S. 169): –

If, upon investigation, it appears to the Officer-in-charge of a police station that there is no sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion to justify the forwarding of an accused to a Magistrate, such officer shall (if such person is in custody) release him on his executing a bond, with or without sureties, as such an officer may direct, to appear, if and when so required, before a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence on a police report and to try the accused or commit him for trial.

(2) Cases to be sent to Magistrate when evidence is sufficient (S. 170): –

Suppose it is found that there is sufficient evidence or reasonable ground for suspicion exists. In that case, the station officer (Officer-in-charge of a police station) shall send the accused in custody to a Magistrate. If the offence is bailable, he shall take security from the accused for his appearance before the Magistrate on a fixed day and further day-to-day attendance until otherwise directed. He shall take bonds for attendance before such Magistrate from the complainant and the prosecution witnesses, and he shall also send any weapon or article which it may be necessary to produce before such Magistrate.

(3) Complainant and witnesses need not be accompanied (S. 171): –

The complainant and the prosecution witnesses are not required to accompany a police officer to the court or to give any security for appearance other than their bonds. But suppose they refuse to attend or execute a bond. In that case, they may be forwarded in custody to the Magistrate competent to take cognizance, who may detain them in custody until the execution of such bonds or until the hearing is completed.

(4) Report of police on completion of investigation charge-sheet (S. 173): –

a) Every investigation is required to be completed without unnecessary delay. As soon as the investigation is completed, a report is to be submitted to the Magistrate having jurisdiction. If the report alleges an accused’s commission of a crime, the report is called a “charge sheet” or “challan.” However, the investigation in relation to the rape of a child may be completed within three months from the date on which the information was recorded by the officer in charge of a police station[10].
b) The report is to be in the form prescribed by the State Government as follows: –

(1) the name of the parties;

(2) the nature of the information;

(3) whether any offence appears to have been committed and, if so, by whom;

(4) whether the accused has been arrested;

(5) whether he has been forwarded in custody or has been released on his bond.

(6) Whether the report of medical examination of a woman has been attached where the investigation relates to an offence under S. 376, 376A to 376D of the I.P.C[11].

c) The Officer shall also communicate to the person loading FIR, in the manner prescribed by the State Government, an action he took in the matter (to the person giving the F.I.R).
d) the report shall normally be submitted through a superior police officer (appointed under S. 158); such officer may, pending the orders of the Magistrate, direct the station house officer to make further investigation.
e) When such a report is in respect of a case to which S. 170 applies (i.e., a case in which the evidence is sufficient), the police officer shall forward it to the Magistrate along with the report: –

(i) all documents or relevant extracts thereof upon which the prosecution proposes to rely (other than those already sent to the Magistrate during the investigation).

(ii) the statement recorded under S. 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses.

f) If the police officer is of the opinion that any part of such statement is not relevant to the subject matter of the proceedings, or its disclosure to an accused is not essential in the interest of justice and is inexpedient in the public interest, he shall indicate that part of such statement and append a note requesting Magistrate to exclude that part from the copies to be supplied to an accused stating his reasons for making such request.
g) Further investigation and Supplementary Report: –

Nothing in S. 173 shall preclude further investigation in respect of an offence after a charge sheet is forwarded to the Magistrate and, whereupon such investigation, the station house officer obtains further evidence, he shall forward to the Magistrate a further report regarding such evidence in the prescribed form.

C) INVESTIGATIONS AND INQUIRIES INTO THE CASES OF UNNATURAL DEATHS, SUICIDES, ETC (Ss. 174 to 176)[12]: –

NOTE

1) POLICE DIARY (S. 172): –

This Section provides that every investigating officer shall day by day enter the proceedings of investigation in a diary stating (i) the time when information reached him, (ii) the time at which he began and closed his investigation, (iii) the places visited by him, and (iv) the circumstances ascertained through his investigation (v), the statements of witnesses recorded during the course of an investigation under S. 161. Such diary shall be a volume and duly paginated[13]. The diary is also called a “Special diary” or “Station House Report”.

A Court may use such a diary not as evidence in the case but as an aid to such inquiry or trial. The accused or his agent is not entitled to call for such a diary, nor shall he be entitled to see it merely because the court refers to it. However, the accused is allowed to use the case diary for cross-examination of the police officer who made it, only under two circumstances viz. (i) if the police officer, while giving evidence, refreshes his memory by referring to the case diary, (ii) if the court uses the diary to contradict such police officer.

The police diaries are not evidence of the facts stated therein; the facts must be proved by examining the writer as a witness.

*****

[1] Cognizable offence means an offence for which a police officer may, under any law for the time being in force, arrest without warrant.

[2] Inserted by Amendment Act, 2008. in the Code.

[3] S. 155.

[4] Inserted by Amendment Act, 2008.

[5] Baliram v. Emperor, AIR 1945 Nag. 1.

[6] 1) Stephen defines ‘confession’ as ‘an admission made at any time by a person charged with a crime stating or suggesting the inference that he committed the crime.’

In 1939, Privy Council in Narayan Swami V. Emperor defined confession.

Lord Atkin observed in above Privy Council’s Case that,

“A confession must either admit in terms the offence or at any rate all the facts which constitute the offence. An admission of a gravely incriminating fact, even a conclusively incriminating fact is not in itself a confession e.g. an admission that the accused is the owner of and was in recent possession of the knife or revolver which caused the death would not be consistent with the natural use of language to construe confession.”

In other words ‘confession’ may be defined as an admission of the offence by a person charged with the offence.

[7] 281. Record of examination of accused.-(l) Whenever the accused is examined by a Metropolitan Magistrate. The Magistrate shall make a memorandum of the substance of the examination of the accused in the language of the Court and such memorandum shall be signed by the Magistrate and shall form part of the record.

(2) Whenever the accused is examined by any Magistrate other than a Metropolitan Magistrate. or by a Court of Session. the whole of such examination. including every question put to him and every answer given by him. shall be recorded in full by the presiding Judge or Magistrate himself or where he is unable to do so owing to a physical 0- other incapacity. under his direction and superintendence by an officer of the Court appointed by him in this behalf.

(3) The record shall. if practicable. be in tht language in which the accused is examined or. if that is not practicable. in the language

of the Court.

(4) The record shall be shown or read to the accused. 0r. if he does not understand the language in which it is written, shall be interpreted to him. in a language which he understands. and he shall be at liberty to explain or add to his answers.

(5) It shall thereafter be signed by the accused and by the Magistrate or presiding Judge. who shall certify under his own hand that the examination was taken in his present and hearing and that the record contains a full and true account of the statement made by the accused.

(6) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to apply to the examination of an accused person in the course of a summary trial.

[8] Inserted by 2008;s amendment.

[9] Person arrested not to be detained more than twenty-four hours (S. 157).-

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.

[10] Inserted by the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2008.

[11] As amended by 2008’s Act.

[12] 1) Police to inquire and report on suicide (S. 174): –

The station officer or a specially empowered police officer, on receiving information that a person has committed suicide or been killed by another or by an animal, machinery or accident or has died under suspicious circumstances, shall immediately give information to the nearest Executive Magistrate and proceed to the place in the presence of two or more respectable persons of the neighborhood make an investigation and draw a report of the apparent cause of death describing the wounds, fractures and marks of injury found and send it to the proper Magistrate. If there is any suspicion as to the cause of death, he shall send the dead body with a view to its being examined to the nearest Civil Surgeon or other medical officer appointed by the State Government in this behalf if the state of weather and distance allow the dead body to be sent without danger or putrefaction with would render such examination useless.

2) Power to summon persons (S. 175): –

The police may, by order in writing, summon two or more persons for investigation and persons acquainted with the facts of the case and every such person is bound to answer truly all questions.

3) Inquiry by Magistrate into cause of death (S. 176): –

the nearest Magistrate empowered to hold inquests may hold an inquiry into the cause of death either, instead or in addition to, police investigation, but when a person dies in the custody of the police such Magistrate shall hold the inquest. For the purpose of inquest the Magistrate may cause the dead body of any person to be disinterred and examined.

[13] As amended by 2008’s Act.