Deergh Uppal
An investigation is an integral aspect of criminal proceedings. The first step is “investigation” after a crime is committed or information obtained by a law enforcement officer about the commission of an offense. The aim is to find the suspect and prosecute him for trial in order to prosecute him in compliance with the rules of the Code.
Section 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure grants law enforcement officers the authority to investigate crimes that are cognizable. In non-cognizable cases, without a warrant, the police officer has no power to investigate and must procure a warrant under Section 155(2) of the Code. Section 2(h) of the Code has described the word ‘investigation’.
Chapter XII (Sections 154 to 176) of the Code deals with information to police and their powers to investigate.
Definition
“Investigation” is defined in the section 2(h) of CRPC and it is as follows –
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, 2(h), Form 1 “Investigation includes all proceedings under the CrPCfor collection of evidence conducted by a Police Officer or any person (other than a Magistrate) authorized by a Magistrate in this behalf”.
Explanation –The section basically defines investigation it says that any law enforcement officer or any citizen who is authorized by the magistrate searches for or finds any evidence in relation to any case is doing investigation for the same
Illustration – For example a civilian is finding any evidence for any case like bullet shells for a case of shooting then his act won’t be considered as investigation but in the same scenario a police officer is doing it then that would come in the ambit of investigation
- The investigation of an offence consists of:
- Going to the spot of investigation or proceedings
- Verification of the facts and circumstances of the situation.
- Discovery and the suspect’s capture.
- Collection of evidence that may contain:
- Examination of individual or individuals concerned and reduction to writing of their declaration.
- Search and seizure of locations and items deemed appropriate, respectively.
- Formation of opinion as to whether a case for prosecution exists, and taking the necessary steps accordingly.
Procedure for Investigation:
Section 157 of the Code sets out the protocols so as to dictate how the investigation should be followed. The section specifies that any report or information sent to the officer in charge of the police station for the commission of a cognizable offence be sent immediately to the qualified magistrate.
A police officer is expected to report to the magistrate who has the authority to prosecute such cases as soon as he receives information or has grounds to suspect the commission of some cognizable offence.
The Magistrate is empowered to inform any subordinate officer of an offense and to order him to investigate the location, facts and circumstances of the case and to take the appropriate steps to discover and arrest the defendant.
The report is sent to the Magistrate to keep him updated on the investigation so that he can provide sufficient guidance. Section 157 allows a police officer to file a report immediately, which means the report must be submitted without undue delay. Delay would not make the argument uncertain, but he will put the Court on guard.
The investigative protocol starts with this part. The prosecution process covers all proceedings related to in the Criminal Procedure Code for the processing of evidence carried out by the police officer.
In cases where there is no crime of a grievous sort, the police do not have to necessarily continue with the prosecution process in those instances. They do not do so in a case in which the police officer does not feel it appropriate to continue the investigation process. The explanation why the investigation process is not being carried out by the police must be clearly specified in the report prepared by the police.
Information theory offers a valuable viewpoint on the method of criminal investigation . The criminal investigation method resembles a struggle between the police and the suspect for crime-related information, according to information theory.
The perpetrator emits’ signs’ or leaves behind knowledge of different kinds (fingerprints, impressions of eyewitnesses, murder weapons, etc.) while committing the crime, which the police aim to obtain by forensic efforts.
If the offender is able to reduce the amount of information available to be retrieved by the police, or whether the police are unable to recognize the information left behind, the offender will not be arrested and the perpetrator would thus win the battle. If a large amount of signals from the perpetrator can be obtained by the police, then the perpetrator can be detected and arrested and the police will win. The importance of information in a criminal case is clearly underlined by this viewpoint.
Cognizable and Non-Cognizable Offence
Section 2(C) of the Code describes a cognizable offence in which a police officer may detain anyone without a warrant. The crime is serious in nature and is a public wrong, where the prosecution is carried out at the discretion of the state. With imprisonment of 3 years or more and with or without fines, penalty is given. For Example – dowry, rape, homicide, etc.
In Section 2 (l) of the Code, the non-cognizable crime and case have been established in which the police cannot arrest without a warrant. The offence is less serious in nature and, at the initiative of the parties, the investigation is carried out. Punishment of no more than 3 years imprisonment can be given. Examples include attack, falsification, slander, etc.
Case law
Tula Ram v Kishore Singh
The basic facts of the case that happen was Kishore Singh Brother Balbir Singh and his accomplice came from Pakistan illegally and told Tula ram to sell a piece of cloth on credit which he disagreed due to this Balbir Singh and his accomplice started to beat him due to which Tula rams employees and family members started to shoot at them which caused Balbir Singh death.
Due to the death of Kishore Singh brother he tried to file a case against Tula ram, in the police station the law enforcement officer due to this he filed the case directly with the magistrate.
The magistrate ordered the police station to investigate the case under Section 156(3) Code of Criminal Procedure (1973) hence it shows that the magistrate has power to order investigation in pre-cognizance stage only.
Information to the Police Officer
Section 154 of the Code addresses whether information is provided as a cognizable offense. The details must be sent in writing by the informant to the officer in charge of the police station, or by the officer in charge of the police station in writing.
If the information is submitted by a woman against whom any of the offenses under Sections 326-A, 326-B, 354, 354-A to 354-D, 376, 376-A to 376-E or 509 IPC are suspected to have been committed or attempted, the written information must be read and signed by the informant, which is considered as ‘First Information Report.’
After the police officer has obtained the information, they shall commence his investigation, given that he has cause to believe that a cognizable crime has been committed.
Power of Police
Section 156 of the Code empowers the officer in charge of the police station, without the order of the Judge, to prosecute a case in his territorial jurisdiction if the crime is of a cognizable type. On the orders of the magistrate empowered under Section 190, the officer may also initiate an investigation.
Procedure of Investigation
Section 157 of the Code sets down the investigative protocol to be followed for the processing of evidence by the police. The investigation of a cognizable case starts when, on the basis of the FIR or any other information obtained, a police officer in charge of a police station has cause to suspect the commission of a cognizable offence.
It demands that the FIR be submitted to the Magistrate for prompt intimation. The officer shall then proceed, in person, to the place of investigation of the facts and circumstances, or deploy one of his subordinate officers to investigate the facts and circumstances, and, if possible, take steps for the identification and arrest of the person.
If the information obtained by the police officer is not of a critical sort, the officer does not need to continue or prosecute on the spot in person or deploy a subordinate officer. And if there is no appropriate basis for going into an investigation, the matter shall not be prosecuted.
It shall state in its report that it has not met with the provisions of this section and shall advise the informant that it will not prosecute the case or allow the case to be investigated. This report shall then be submitted to the magistrate empowered to take cognizance of such an offense.
Sending a Report to the Magistrate
The Judge is given a report which is known to as the police report. The superior police officer sends it in order to make the magistrate know that a police officer is investigating a specific crime. The key purpose of submitting a report is to encourage the Judge, if necessary under Section 159 of the Code, to control the inquiry and provide orders.
The Report should be submitted without delay to the Magistrate. It was held in Swati Ram v. State of Rajasthan that simple delay in submitting the report did not in its entirety throw away the prosecution argument.
Different findings must be sent to the magistrate by the police at different points of the investigation. Those records are as follows:
The officer in charge of the police station is required by Section 157 of the CrPC to send a report to the Magistrate, called a preliminary report.
The subordinate officer is required by section 168 of the CrPC to send a report to the officer in charge of the police station.
Section 173 of the CrPC requires the issuance of a full report to the Magistrate as soon as the inquiry is finished.
Attendance of Witnesses
The police officer is empowered by Section 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code to demand the presence of witnesses within the jurisdiction of the police station.
However, if the male person is younger than 15 years of age or more than 65 years of age, or if the female or mentally or physically ill person is more than 65 years of age, the presence of the male person shall be demanded at the location where he lives.
An investigating police officer can warrant that any person living within the boundaries of his or her own or neighboring station, including the victim, who is familiar with the facts and circumstances of the case, be present.
No male or female person under the age of fifteen shall, be required to visit any place other than the place of residence where that person resides. Such a person may be interviewed verbally by a police officer and he is obliged to truly answer any questions posed to him about the case until the responses to the questions appear to subject him to a criminal conviction or a punishment or forfeiture.
These comments may also be simplified by the police officer’s audio-video electronic means to written statements. The police officer would provide the accused with copies of the statements.
Examination of Witnesses
Any police officer in charge of the investigation, or any other officer acting at the behest of the officer in charge, shall and shall be empowered to interview a witness or person who is aware of the facts and circumstances of the case before him.
Section 161 of the Law grants the police powers to prosecute witnesses. As they can render a person guilty or innocent, the claims of witnesses are essential. The people who are being examined are required and obligated to truly answer all the questions put before them surrounding such cases. They are not obliged to even address the questions that will place a felony complaint or some other charge on them.
The number of comments made by the person during the process of the interview shall be decreased by the police officer making the inquiry after the examination. And if he does so, he must maintain a separate record of it. He is not obligated to minimize the written comments, although it is recommended that he do so.
Preparation of charge sheet
A police officer is allowed to request a post-investigation charge sheet. It contains a copy of the FIR, the complainant’s complaint, witnesses, panchnama, declaration of death, etc.
As soon as the investigation is finished, the officer in charge of the police station shall send a report to the magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offense on a police report by the State Government, in the manner specified, specifying the names of the parties, the nature of the facts, the names of the person, whether or not the circumstances of the case were known, He shall communicate the action taken, to the informant.
Statements to the Police not to be Signed
There is no need to sign the representations made by the witnesses during the examination. At any investigation or tribunal, none can be included. In court, the comments made by the witness will only be used to refute him, not to corroborate him.
If the witness is brought by the side of the defense, the accused may use some aspect of his testimony, if proven, and the prosecution may use it only with the approval of the Court to refute him. That is, to refute him, comments made under Section 161 may be included.
However, an exception to the aforementioned clause is: if any statement falls within the scope of Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, or if any statement affects the provisions of Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act.
Recording of Confessions and Statements
According to Section 164, any judge, whether metropolitan or judicial, whether he has authority or not in the event, is allowed to record any statement or confession made to him during the investigation.
Although a police officer on whom a magistrate’s powers have been conferred for the time being is not allowed to record the same thing. Before recording the declaration, the magistrate is supposed to justify it to the person who provides the statement that he is not obliged to give it, and the statements will be used as testimony against him.
The magistrate needs to make sure that it is willingly performed by the person making the confession. If the individual refuses to give a statement at any time until the confession is made, the judge can not authorize the arrest of that person in police custody.
Admissibility of Evidence
As substantive evidence, the confession recorded under section 164 may be used without being officially proven. It is admissible as evidence to document such a confession. The entire confession must be registered. It needs to be carefully weighed by the Court with other facts. Half of it could be dismissed by the Judge… Where the confession was considered rejected, it was not possible to retain the convictions based on them.
The non-confessional statements reported in compliance with section 164 are not substantive evidence. However, if the author of the statement is called as a witness in the courtroom, under sections 145 and 157 of the Proof Act, his earlier statement will be used to refute his testimony in the Case.
It was held in Balak Ram v. The State of U.P. that witness testimony should not be ignored simply because their declaration was reported in compliance with section 164. It is important to treat their facts with caution.
Search by Police Officer
Under Section 165 of the Law, a police officer is allowed to look for any spot that he has fair reasons to suspect includes something necessary with regard to the investigation he is authorized to perform.
The reasons for issuing a search warrant as set out in Section 93(1) of the Code the search must be reported by the state government in the journal specified for this purpose.
Procedure of Search
A police officer must report his reasons for the search in writing, the area to be searched and the item that has to be searched in that area, in which he starts in person. If the police officer is unable to perform the search himself, then he will order his subordinate officer to perform the search in writing, guiding him to the search location and the item to be looked for.
And on the basis of the written order given to him, the subordinate officer may then perform the search. The officer should register the search carried out and give a copy of the same to the nearest magistrate who will offer it free of charge to the owner/occupier of the area searched.
Procedure when Investigation cannot be Completed within 24 Hours
Section 167 deals with a procedure where it is not possible to conclude the investigation within 24 hours. This portion is meant to guarantee liberal democratic philosophy. The aim is to shield the accused from police atrocities and to allow the Magistrate the opportunity to determine the matter of further incarceration, to encourage the prosecution, and not to apprehend him without trial.
It has been given, for this reason, that the charged or arrested person cannot be held for more than 24 hours. In the following conditions, section 167 is drawn:
- When the accused is arrested without a warrant and is detained by the police officer in his custody.
- More than 24 hours needed for an investigation.
- There are grounds to believe that accusation or information against him is well-founded.
- The officer in charge of a police station or the investigating officer not below the rank of sub-inspector forwards the accused for remand before the Magistrate.
The judicial magistrate to whom the accused is sent may, for a period not exceeding 15 days, permit the imprisonment of that person in such custody. If the Magistrate does not have authority to prosecute the case and feels that further arrest is inappropriate, the suspect shall be referred to the Magistrate with jurisdiction to prosecute the case.
The Magistrate shall allow the accused to be arrested (but not in police custody) if he has reasons and grounds for thinking that this is appropriate. In any case, the Judge cannot order imprisonment for a period in exceeding:
- 90 days, when the person is accused of an offence punishable with imprisonment for a period not less than 10 years of imprisonment for life or death.
- 60 days, when accused of any other offence. And on the expiry of the period of 60 days or 90 days, whatever the case may be, he shall be released on bail if he is able to furnish sureties.
This period is to be calculated from the date of detention and not from the date of arrest.
If the Judicial Magistrate is absent, the Executive Magistrate or the Metropolitan Magistrate on whom the powers of a Judicial Magistrate have been conferred for the time being will act. The Executive Magistrate shall order for detention for a period not exceeding 7 days. If further detention is to be made, the accused shall be forwarded to the competent Magistrate.
If the order is given by any Magistrate other than the Chief Judicial Magistrate, he shall forward a copy of his orders also stating the reasons for making so, to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
In the case of a summons, if the inquiry is not concluded within six months, the Judge is obliged to request that the investigation be halted because it has justification and grounds for thinking that further investigation is required for the sake of justice.
If the Magistrate has directed that the investigation be halted and an appeal against the order is submitted to the Judge of the Sessions, the Judge of the Sessions shall be allowed, in compliance with Section 167(6), to reject the order issued by the Magistrate under sub-section 5, if there are appropriate grounds for doing so.
Procedure to be followed on completion of Investigation (s.169-s.173)
- Release of accused when evidence is deficient
In the absence of adequate proof and fair reasons to warrant the referral of the accused to the Magistrate, the police officer shall release the accused on the basis of the execution of the contract, with or without guarantees, and may compel the accused to appear before the Magistrate if necessary.
- Cases to be sent to Magistrate when evidence sufficient
Where adequate proof and fair grounds are available to the police officer, the defendant shall be forwarded to the Magistrate so that the Magistrate can take cognizance of the crime and try the defendant or commit him for trial.
Where the crime is bailable, immunity shall be extended to the accused and released on bond, only to appear before the Judge, if requested, and before the Magistrate for his regular attendance.
- Diary of proceedings in an investigation (section 172)
This section refers to the contents of a case journal that must be kept by a police officer doing an investigation. The aim of this section is to encourage a police officer who was investigating the case to let the Magistrate know what the day-to-day detail was.
In this case, oral comments by witnesses should not be documented in a notebook. At trial or investigation, this diary can be used not as testimony, but to assist the court in dealing with the case.
- Report of police on completion of the investigation
Under Section 173, the full report of the police officer shall be submitted to the Magistrate after the conclusion of the inquiry. In general, this report is referred to as a “Charge-sheet” or “Challan.”
Where the Superior Officer is named by the Government of the State, the report shall be submitted by him to the Magistrate. And when the orders of the Magistrate are pending, the officer in charge of the police station shall direct the further investigation.
Where, according to the police officer, part of the argument made in the report filed by him is meaningless, the Magistrate shall order that part of the statement be omitted and not considered. Further examination can also be carried out right after the submission of to the Magistrate.
Conclusion
We may draw the inference from this research report that the forces of the police must be given the highest priority during the process of the inquiry. These powers of the police have been routinely established in the Code of Criminal Law, 1973. The investigating protocol has been provided under the code as well as the process in which the police must pursue the investigation when treating any given case.
The research study also shows that while the police can have some discretionary rights when carrying out every investigation, there are still some ways under which the police may not unilaterally abuse the power confrere in the context of investigation.
The study highlighted the investigative process of both cognizable and non-cognizable incidents, and the role of the police in carrying out such inquiries. It is to be noted through the research review that while rules and procedures for the investigative process are properly laid down, the investigation is also not carried out in the proper manner.
The police are frequently seen to abuse their authority and thus do not function in line with the trust in which they have been granted the powers.