9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (11) TMI 361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Magistrate to furnish certified copies of: (a)Remand report dated 16th November, 1982; (b)Affidavit filed by the investigating officer seeking police custody of the accused; (c)Order of the Magistrate dated 16th November, 1982 made on the remand report; (d)Endorsement and order made by the learned Magistrate regarding any complaint made by the arrestee as regards any ill treatment meted out to him at the hands of the police; 3. Crl. M.P. No. 6900 of 1982 is filed under S. 482 of the Code by A1 to A14 in Crime No. 275 of 1982 on the file of Tiruvallur Police Station for a direction to the Magistrate to issue a certified copy of the F.I.R., which prayer has been turned down on the strength of the decision in Muthuswamy, In re 1982 L.W. (Cri.) 60 : 4. Crl. M.P. No. 1907 of 1983 is filed under S. 482 of the Code by the accused in R.C. No. 1 of 1983 on the file of the C.B.I., E.O.W., Madras, for a direction to the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, E.O.I. Egmore, Madras, to furnish him a certified copy of the F.I.R. 5. Crl. M.P. No. 2903 of 1984 is filed under S. 482 of the Code by the accused in Crime No. 6 of 1983 on the file of the Vigilance and Anti-Corru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bservation mahazar prepared by the investigating officer ? 8. Now, we shall, first of all, examine the question with reference to the grant of copy of the first information report even before a police report under S. 173(2) is forwarded. WHAT IS A FIRST INFORMATION REPORT ? The expression first information or first information report is not defined in the Code, But these words are always understood to mean information recorded under S. 154 of the Code . The word 'information' occurring in the said S. means something in the nature of a complaint or accusation or at least information of a crime given with the object of setting the criminal law in motion and the police starting the investigation. Sub-S (1) of S. 154 in Chap.XII dealing with the recording of first information, reads as follows: 154. Information in cognizable cases: (1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer incharge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilt up and upon which an investigation should be, and ordinarily is, commenced by the police under Chapter XII of the Code. 10. Whether a person brought as an accused on the basis of the information (FIR) is entitled to a copy of the same? The above question whether the accused is entitled to have a copy of the first information report, which is a valuable document as pointed out supra, even before the police report (which is commonly known as 'charge sheet') is forwarded to the Magistrate on completion of the investigation as contemplated under S. 173(2) of the Code still remains a controversial issue, and there are divergent opinions in this regard. This Court, in A Manual of Instructions for the Guidance of Magistrates in the Madras State (published before the Amendment Act of 1955) under Serial No. 26, dealing with the grant of copies, examined the stage at which the accused is entitled to ask for copies of certain documents, such as first information reports, inquest reports, statements recorded under S. 164 of the Code, etc., and instructed that copies of first information reports, and search lists could be furnished to the accused at any stage of the trial, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tled before trial to have copies of such reports. This question, on reference was decided by a Full Bench of this Court consisting of four Judges. Collins C.J., and Benson, J., two of the four learned Judges held that the reports under S. 173 Code of Criminal Procedure were not public documents, whilst the other two learned Judges, viz., Shophard and Subramania Ayyar, JJ. held that reports under S. 173, Code of Criminal Procedure were public documents, and, therefore, the accused was entitled to have a copy of the same. (It seems that though the four learned Judges were divided equally on this question, the opinions expressed by Collins, C.J. and Benson. J. are supposed to have prevailed under the provisions of the Letters Patent. Though it is not relevant for the further discussion on this question, it may not be out of place to mention here that this judgment came up for adverse criticism at the hands of the Law Reporters, who have not agreed with the opinions expressed by Collins C.J., and Benson. J. (See 1897 MLJ 7 341). Thereafter in Emperor v. Muthia Swamiyar I.L.R. (1907) Mad. 466 a question was referred to a Division Bench consisting of Benson, J. and Wallis, J., for determ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed will be entitled to copies of the same under S. 76 of the Evidence Act at any stage of the investigation and even before the filing of the charge-sheet and whether there are any provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law prohibiting- granting of copies at the stages mentioned above ? The Full Bench comprised of Somasundaram J. (who referred the question) and Ramachandra Iyer and Anantanarayanan JJ (as they were then). The judgement of the Full Bench is reported in State of Madras v. G. Krishnan A.I.R. 1961 Mad 92 (F.B.). The latter two learned Judges of the Full Bench, after going deep into the question, gave two different, but concurrent, judgments, with which Somasundaram J. agreed. Ramachandra Iyer J. (as he then was) has concluded in paragraph 36 of his judgment as follows. Our answer to the question therefore can be stated thus: (I) The statements recorded under S. 164, Crl. P.C., would be public documents falling under S. 74(1)(iii) of the Indian Evidence Act. (2) The accused will be entitled to copies of the same as a person interested; (3) But his right to obtain such copies before the filing of the charge-sheet has been taken away by implicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 131 of , The learned Judge ruled that the accused, after arrest or if he is likely to be arrested is entitled to a copy of the first information report from the concerned Magistrate on payment of the necessary charges. 15. The same issue again came up before Maheswaran, J., in Muihusamy, In re 1982 L.W. Cri. 60. The learned Judge dissented from the view taken by Krishnaswamy Reddy, J., in Chinnappan v. State 1975 T.L.N.J. 60 (supra), and following the judgment of the Full Bench in State of Madras v. G Krishnan A.I.R. 1961 Mad. 92 F.B.: 1961: 1: M.L.J. 65: 73 L.W. 713: 1960 M.W.N. 782: I.L.R. 1961 Mad. 1 and referring to S 207 of the present Code, held, I feel that the entire scheme of the Act is that the investigation into an offence should necessarily be kept confidential and that copies to the accused could be furnished only after the charge-sheet is filed. Thus, there is a conflict of judicial pronouncements of this Court as the question of entitlement of the accused to obtain a copy of the first information report before the police report (charge-sheet) is filed under S. 173(2) of the Code This conflict of views taken by the learned Judges of this Court has necessitate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proper, shall be furnished to the accused. By S. 29 of the Amendment Act (XXVI of 1955), a new Section, viz, S. 207A, dealing with the procedure to be adopted in proceedings instituted on police report was inserted. For our purpose, we reproduce sub-S. (3) of S. 207A, Crl. P.C., 1898, as under: At the commencement of the inquiry, the Magistrate shall, when the accused appears or is brought before him, satisfy himself that the documents referred to in S 173 have been furnished to the accused and if he finds that the accused has not been furnished with such documents or any of them, he shall cause the same to be so furnished. In the present Code of 1973, a new S. (S.207) relating to the supply of copy of police report and other documents, to the accused has been introduced. That section reads as follows: In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of each of the following: (i) The police report: (ii) The first information report recorded under S. 154; (iii) The statements recorded under sub-S. (3) of S. 161 of all persons whom the prosecution proposes to e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has observed thus: There is also the fact that before the amendment the accused had to request the Court to refer to the statements made to the police officer and furnish him with a copy thereof in order that the same may be used for contradicting the witness, but as it now stands, no such request is necessary because there is, as will be shown later, a provision to the effect that copies should be given earlier. S.173 relates to the report of the police officer and sub -S. (4) is practically a new provision. There is also a new sub-S.(5) added. It is clear from this new (sub-S. (1)) that when the police officer after completing the investigation sends his report to the Magistrate copies of the statements and documents referred to should be furnished to the accused The object of this provision is to put the accused on notice of what he has to meet at the time of the inquiry or trial. The unamended sub-S.(4) had only laid down that a copy of the report forwarded to the Magistrate, shall, on application, be furnished to the accused before the commencement of the inquiry or trial. There was no compulsion to furnish him with copies of the statements, documents, etc. We may n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Cl.(iii) of S. 207 and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request under S. 173(6), direct that a copy of that part of the statement or such portion thereof, as he thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused. S. 208 of the Code is a new introduction, and it deals with the supply of copies of documents and statements to the accused in respect of cases exclusively triable by a Court of Session instituted on a complaint or otherwise than on police report. The duty of supplying the copies under S. 208 also is cast on the Magistrate, who is obliged to furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of each of the documents enumerated under Cls. (i) to (iii) of S. 208. 19. Thus, we find that there is an obligation on the part of the Magistrate in a proceeding instituted on a police report to furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of the first information report recorded under S. 154 along with copies of the police report and other statements. The police report (which we commonly call as charge-sheet, which expression appears to have been borrowed from the Madras Police Standing Orders-Form 87 evolved presumably prior to the Code of Criminal Procedur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of a non-bailable offence, he shall inform the person arrested that he is entitled to be released on bail and that he may arrange for sureties on his behalf. In this connection, reference also can be made to S. 104 of the Customs Act and S. 35(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, which provisions are analogous to S. 50 of the Code, enjoining a duty on the arrester to inform the arrestee of the grounds for his arrest. Before the introduction of S. 50 of the Code, a question whether, an arrestee has a right to be informed of the reasons or grounds for his arrest, arose before the Supreme Court and the various High Courts, and the answers were given affirmatively by a number of authoritative judicial pronouncements which we would refer to in the succeeding portion of this order in appropriate places. 21. In the text book, Burn's Justice of The Peace by Rev. Richard Burn, D.C.L., which deals in detail with the law of arrest without warrant, it is stated in Volume I, page 302, that, Where a constable acts without warrant by virtue of his office of constable, he should, unless the party be previously acquainted with it, notify that he is a constable, or that he arre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not mean that technical or precise language need be used. The matter is a matter of substance, and turns on the elementary proposition that in this country a person is, prima facie, entitled to his freedom and is only required to submit to restraint on his freedom if he knows in substance the reason why it is claimed that this restraint should be imposed. 5. The person arrested cannot complain that he has not been supplied with the above information as and when he should be, if he himself produces the situation which makes it practically impossible to inform him, e.g., by immediate counter-attack or by running away. Lord Simonds, who was also a party to that judgment, expressed his view as follows: First, I would say that it is the right of every citizen to be free from arrest unless there is in some other citizen, whether a constable or not, the right to arrest him. I would say next that it is the corollary of the right of every citizen to be thus free from arrest that he should be entitled to resist anest unless that arrest is lawful. How can these rights be reconciled with the proposition that he may be arrested without knowing why he is arrested ? It is to be remembere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itute false imprisonment, whether the person making the arrest is a policeman or a private individual. It was decided by the House of Lords in the celebrated case in Bird v. Jones 1846 7 Q.B. 742 that a police officer who arrests a person must, in ordinary circumstances, tell him the true grounds for his arrest and that if he does not do so, the arrest is unlawful. The rule enunciated in Christie v. Leachinsky Vol. I H.L. 1947 A.E.R. 567 and Bird v. Jones Vol. I H.L. 1947 A.E.R. 567 is now incorporated in the English Act which provides that if a person is arrested, he must be informed at the time of his arrest or as soon as practicable the grounds for his arrest. 25. Before a Division of Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Vimal Kishore Mehrotra v. State of U.P. A.I.R. 1956 ALL 56: 1956 Cri. L.J. 13, a similar matter came up for decision. The petitioner in that case was informed that he had been arrested under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932. The learned Judges deciding the case observed: S.7, Criminal Law Amendment Act prohibits several acts. It may be that prohibition of some of these acts is unconstitutional. But it does not follow that prohibition of other acts a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uarantee as contemplated by Article 2C(l) of the Constitution of India. 26. In Panchanan Mondal v. The State 1971 Cri. L.J. 875, it was contended that the accused was entitled to a copy of the F.I.R. as part of the record. It was held by a learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court in that case, that the question was one of 'stage' and the provisions contained in S. 157(1) of the Code by themselves did not entitle the accused to such a copy, and copies of all documents sent to Court and forming part thereof cannot as such be granted to the accused irrespective of the stage reached in the case. It was held by the learned judge that, although F I.R. formed part of the record, the accused would not be entitled, merely on that footing to a copy thereof irrespective of the stage reached, independently of the other provisions in the statute, and of other considerations, entitling him to have the same. In view, however, of the other specific provisions in the different statutes, the learned Judge held that the case of F.I.R. is different and the accused is entitled to a copy thereof on payment of the legal fees therefore at any 'stage'. 27. Before a Division Ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ell-established canon of construction that the Court should read the section as it is and cannot rewrite it to suit its convenience; nor does any canon of construction permit the Court to read the section in such manner as to render it to some extent otiose Having regard to the above principles, we have to read, construe and interpret S. 50 as it stands in the light of Article 22(l) of the Constitution of India, but not in a manner as to render it otiose. 29. Arrest is undoubtedly a serious inroad into the fundamental right of the personal liberty of the subject, and hence it has to be strictly in accordance with law. Indeed, the law relating to the exercise of the power of arrest should be as strictly construed as possible so that light or flippant interference with the most valued of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution may be rendered difficult, if not impossible. The meaning of the expression arrest came up for consideration before a Full Bench of this Court, to which one of us (Ratnavel Pandian J., as he then was) was a party, in Rohsan Beevi v. Joint Secretary to the Government, Tamil Nadu, Public Dept, etc 1983 L.W. (Cri.) 289 (F.B.). The Full Bench, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Gopalan v. State of Madras A.I.R. 1950 S.C. 27: 63 L.W. 638, to the effect that the expression the procedure established by law occurring in Article 22 of the Constitution means the procedure prescribed by the law of the State , but that view was overruled by the decisions in RC. Cooper v. Union of India A.I.R. 1970 S.C. 564, and in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 597, in the latter of which decisions it has been held: ... the procedure contemplated by Article 21 must answer the test of reasonableness in order to be in conformity with Article 14. It must be 'right and just and fair', and not arbitrary, fanciful or oppressive; otherwise, it would be no procedure at all and the requirement of Article 21 would not be satisfied. and, therefore, in view of the present position of law as enunciated by the Supreme Court, it will be reasonable, just and fair that the person who is affected as envisaged under S. 363(5), Crl. P.C, and Rule 339 of the Criminal Rules of Practice (as per which copies of any portion of the record of a criminal case must be furnished to the parties concerned on payment of proper stamp and authorised fee for copying, and where t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ific provisions cannot be furnished to the accused as there is a clear bar under S. 173 of the Code. He cited the decision in Govind Prasad v. State of West Bengal 1975 Cri. L.J. 1910. 33. Mr. T.S. Arunachalam, learned counsel assisting the Court as Amicus Curiae, has argued that the expression communicate in S. 50 of the Code is a strong word, meaning that sufficient knowledge of the basic facts constituting the full particulars of the offence for which the person is arrested or the other grounds for such arrest should be imparted effectively and fully to the arrestee in writing so that the arrestee could, understand the cause of his arrest. Then he relies on the observations of the Supreme Court in State of M.P. v. Shobharam A.I.R 1986 S.C. 1910, which we extract below. There are three rights and each stands by itself. The first is the right to be told the reason of the arrest as soon as an arrest is made, the second is the right to be produced before a Magistrate within twenty four hours and the third is the right to be defended by a lawyer of one's choice. In addition there is the declaration that no person shall be deprived of his personal liberty except by procedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Indian Evidence Act, that the accused will be entitled to copies of the same as a person interested, but his right to obtain such copies before the filing of the charge-sheet has been taken away by implication of the provisions of S. 173(4) of the old Code and that he will be entitled to the copies of the documents only in accordance there with. It is only on the basis of the principles laid down in the above decision, Maheswaran J., has ruled in Muthusamy In re 1982 L.W. (Cri.) 60 that the accused is not entitled even to a copy of the first information report before the Police report (charge-sheet) is filed before the Court. In our opinion, the view taken by Maheswaran, J., is not a correct one for the reasons to be presently mentioned. Firstly, in the Full Bench case, the question referred to for decision was whether the statements under S. 164 of the Code fall under S. 74(1)(iii) of the Indian Evidence Act, and if so, whether the accused would be entitled to copies of the same at any stage of the investigation, even before the filing of the charge-sheet. Secondly, the Full Bench has not considered the constitutional mandate envisaged under Art 22(1) of the Constitution. Ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opy of the first information report, and files the same before the Court. State of West Bengal v. Swapan Kumar Guha A.I.R. 1982 S.C. 949: 1982 M.L.J. Cri. 359. Further when there is a constitutional right to the accused to engage a counsel of his choice to defend him, that right could be exercised only in case he is informed of the nature of the allegations or the charge levelled against him. The argument of learned Public Prosecutor is that what Section 50 of the Code demands is that the person arrested is only to be informed of the grounds of arrest and of his right to bail, and the said provision does not specifically and expressly require a copy of the first information report to be furnished to the accused, as under Section 154(2) of the Code. Though in the heading of Section 50 of the Code, the word informed is used, in the body of the section, the expression communicate is found. In legal parlance, there is a lot of difference between the expression inform and communicate . As Patanjali Sastri, J., pointed out in his separate judgment in Income-tax Commissioner v. Ahmedbhai Umarbhai Company A.I.R 1950 S.C. 134, marginal notes in an Indian Statute, as in an Act of P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndia, in our view, it should not be allowed to flourish or exist on our soil. Every person subjected to arrest is entitled to know why he is deprived of his freedom. It is only with this underlying principle, Section 50 is now introduced in the Code. 39. So much for principles. Coming to practical purposes, we are of the view that certain facts have to be borne in mind. As we have pointed out already, as per the new Code, a copy of the First Information Report is to be given after the final police report is forwarded on completion of investigation to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence and before the stage of the commencement of the proceedings before the Magistrate, as per Section 207 of the Code. Section 50 of the Code does not contemplate the furnishing of a copy of the first information report to the arrestee at the time of arrest. Section 50, which is mandatory, provides that any person arrested without warrant shall, forthwith be communicated with full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest and that if the arrest is made in a bailable case, he shall be informed of his right of entitlement to bail. Even a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting to the accused as under Section 154 of the Code, as per which a copy of the information as recorded under Section 154(1) should be given free of cost, to the informant, in order to avoid any controversy with regard to the communication of the full particulars, we are of the firm view that it would be desirable that the particulars enumerated by us above be communicated to the arrestee in writing and free of cost, which would be in strict compliance of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and Section 50 of the' Code. If the investigating officer, for the purpose of convenience prefers to give a copy of the first information report itself, such a course would be a welcome measure and would meet the requirements of Section 50 of the Code in its true tenor and spirit. We are alive to the situation that there may be cases of mass arrest in which it may not be possible for the concerned police officer to communicate forthwith in writing the full particulars of the offence, in which event, the particulars may be communicated first orally and then in writing as expeditiously as possible. In this connection, we would like to express our view that the failure to communicate th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... strate ? There are two sections in the Code, Ss. 167 and 309 of the Code (corresponding to Section 344 of the old Code), which empower the Magistrate or the Court respectively to grant time to the police in connection with the investigation of the case. Under Section 167 of the Code, if any person is arrested and detained in custody and it appears that the investigation cannot be completed within the period of twenty-four hours fixed by Section 57, and there are grounds for believing that the accusation or information is well-founded, the officer in charge of the police station or the investigating officer shall forward the accused to the nearest Magistrate with a copy of the entries in the diary relating to the case. Thereafter, under Section 167 (2) of the Code, the Magistrate to whom an accused person is forwarded, whether he has or has not jurisdiction to try the case, from time to time, may authorise the detention of the accused in such custody as such Magistrate thinks fit, for a period not exceeding fifteen days in the whole. If a Magistrate, who has no jurisdiction to try the case or commit it for trial and who has authorised the detention of the accused, considers further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther evidence may be obtained by extension of the remand of the accused, after the expiry of the period of fifteen days in terms of the order under Section 167 of the Code. Neither Section 167 of the Code nor Section 309 of the Code which contains the provision for authorising detention and the provision of remand and the extension of remand of the accused respectively contemplates expressly any report by the police, which in practice is called 'remand report'. 0.593(1) of the Madras Police Standing Orders dealing with Further uses of the case diary reads thus: Remands should be applied for on case diary for Ms. S 167(1) Crl. P.C, requires a copy of the case diary to be sent when remand is sought. The investigating officer should, therefore, prepare an additional carbon copy of the case diary when he is aware that he will have to send a prisoner for remand. However, it is the practice in vogue to submit a report under the name Remand report containing such particulars and necessary information apart from furnishing entries in the case diary or copies thereof, on perusal and examination of which the Magistrate should take a decision as to whether or not the accused ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h are relevant for our purpose, read as follows: 172(1)... (1) Any Criminal Court may send for the police diaries of a case under inquiry or trial in such Court, and may use such diaries, not as evidence in the case, but to aid it in such inquiry or trial. (3) Neither the accused nor his agents shall be entitled to call for such diaries, nor shall he or they be entitled to see them merely because they are referred to by the Court; but, if they are used by the police officer who made them to refresh his memory, or if the Court uses them for the purpose of contradicting such police officer, the provisions of Section 161 or Section 145, as the case may be, of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, shall apply. (Sub-S. (2) of the old Code corresponds to the above present sub-Ss. (2) and (3)). The above sub-S. (3) makes it absolutely clear that neither the accused nor his agents are entitled to call for the police diary of a case, either during inquiry or trial; nor the accused and his counsel are entitled to see the same, merely because the entries in the case diary are referred to by the Court, except under circumstances when the entries are used by the police officer who made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Legislature has not placed any prohibition, then it would tantamount to furnishing a copy of the substance of the case diary itself in other form, which the Legislature has prohibited by a statutory inhibition in that behalf. In other words, the case diary is the genus and the remand report is only a species, and, therefore, the prohibition made under Section 172(3) with regard to the genus, (i.e., entries in the case diary) will apply on all fours to its species (i.e., remand report). In case a certified copy of the remand report is furnished to the accused containing the information so far collected with all the particulars, then there is every likelihood of the accused tampering with the evidence and collection of further evidence in that line, thereby hindering and stultifying the course of investigation. 45. In fact, this problem arises only on account of the investigating officer sending a 'remand report' which is not contemplated under law. Therefore, we hold that the judicial remand should be applied by the concerned police officials in strict compliance with the provisions of Section 167 of the Code and 0.593(1) of the Madras Police Standing Orders. In such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tem and medically treating the injured, the rough sketch of the scene place, and the observation mahazar prepared by the investigating officer ? S.174 of the Code was intended to apply to a case where inquest is necessary. The investigation under this section is limited in scope and confined to the ascertainment of the actual cause of death, as to whether in a given case, death was accidental, suicidal, homicidal or caused by any other reason. It is not necessary that all the witnesses are to be examined during the inquest As pointed out by the Supreme Court in Shakila Khader v. N. Nausher Gama A.I.R. 1975 S.C. 1324. In an inquest, all the witnesses need not be examined, as an inquest under Section 174, Crl. P.C, is concerned with establishing the cause of the death and only evidence necessary to establish it need be brought out. In Marudamuthu Kudumban v. King-Emperor I.L.R. 1950 Mad 750: 25 L.W. 599 it has been ruled that the accused is not entitled to the copies of the inquest statements, and that the procedure which governs the copies of statements under Section 162, Crl. P.C, would govern also the grant of copies of statements, made at the inquest. (See also Razik Ram ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s being examined to the nearest Civil Surgeon, or other qualified medical man, appointed in this behalf by the State Government, if the state of the weather and the distance admit of its being so forwarded without risk of such putrefaction on the road as would render such examination useless, as contemplated under Section 174 (3) of the Code. The most important feature for which the necropsy, i.e., postmortem examination, is asked for is to obtain the opinion of the Medical Officer as to the causa causans (immediate cause) of death. As per G.O.204, Pub. dated 28-3-1892, Medical Officers have to supply a copy of the post mortem notes on application from an officer not below the rank of Station House Officer, and in addition thereto, the Medical Officers should furnish the police with all possible information calculated to assist the elucidation of the case either orally or in writing. (See Order 615 of the Madras Police Standing Orders). It is during the course of the investigation, the investigating officer, in order to ascertain the nature of the injury and the probable manner in which the injury has been caused, and the nature of the weapon that could have been used, etc., obtain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amamalai relied on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Superintendent and Remembrancer, Legal Affairs, West Bengal v.S Bhowmick A.I.R 1981 S.C. 917: 1981 L.W. Crl. 39 (S.N.). 53. Mr. Sriramulu, relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in Maru Ram v. Union of India A.I.R 1980 S.C. 2147, contended that Sections 173 and 207 are specific provisions overriding the general law, viz., Evidence Act, and therefore, the copies of the documents have to be furnished only according to these specific provisions as per which the accused is entitled to get copies of the documents only after the police report is forwarded. According to him, there is a clear demarcation between the specific provision and the general law, and hence even if these documents are construed to be public documents within the meaning of Section 74(1)(iii) of the Evidence Act, these documents could not be furnished to the accused before the police report (charge-sheet) is submitted on account of the implied restriction, as borne out from a combined reading of Sections 173(2) and 207 of the Code. Mr. Sriramulu would further submit that the ruling relied on by Mr. N.T. Vanamamalai, viz., Superintendent and Remembrancer, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tatutory duty on the officer in charge of the police station to furnish to the accused free of cost the documents contemplated therein. There is no such duty on the police officer under the present Code, but that duty is now cast on the Magistrate to furnish to the accused free of cost the documents enumerated in Section 207, in a case instituted on police report. However, the present Sub-section (7) of Section 173, newly introduced, leaves the matter of granting of copies of the documents mentioned in sub-S. (5) of the new Code, to the convenience of the police officer investigating the case. Never the less, the present sub-S. (7) corresponds to, and replaces, sub-S. (4) of Section 173 of the old Code. If sub-S. (7) is read in conjunction with sub-S. (5) of Section 173, it would make it clear that sub-S. (7) would come into operation only after a police report as contemplated in sub-S. (2)(i) of Section 173 is forwarded to the Magistrate. Therefore, the submission made by Mr. N.T. Vanamamalai and Mr. Rangavajjula on the basis of sub-S. (7) cannot be accepted. 54. S. 548 of the old Code came under Chap XLVT under the heading 'Miscellaneous' of the old Code. Section 363(5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the light of the above proposition of law laid down by the Supreme Court, there cannot be any impediment in granting copies of the above said documents. As rightly pointed out by Mr. Sriramulu, the decision of the Supreme Court in Ram Jethmalini v. Director, CBI. SPE, CIA-I, New Delhi 1987 Cri. L.J. 570 cannot be availed of for the proposition that the accused are entitled to copies of the above-said documents even before the police report is forwarded, for the reason that the petitioner (Ram Jethmalani) in that case sought a writ of mandamus for permitting him inspection of statements and documents in possession of respondent (Director CBS), relating to the investigation and final report under Section 173, Criminal P.C; in respect of a criminal case and to grant him copies or to make copies of certain documents in order to prove his case in a libel action instituted by him in the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice in England. Secondly in that case, the final report under Section 173 of the Code has already been forwarded to the Magistrate. In other words, the investigation in that case was over. Thirdly, the copies were directed to be given to the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e officer is of opinion that any part of any such statement is not relevant to the subject-matter of the proceedings or that its disclosure to the accused is not essential, in the interests of justice and is inexpedient in the public interest, he shall indicate the part of the statement and append a note requesting the Magistrate to exclude that part from the copies to be granted to the accused and stating his reasons for making such request. The Magistrate, to whom such a request is made, as per the first proviso to Section 207, may, after perusing any such part of a statement as is referred to in Cl.(iii) of Section 207, and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request, direct that a copy of that part of the statement or of such portion thereof as the Magistrate thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused. This contingency will arise only after the report has been forwarded to the Magistrate, because sub-S.(6) of Section 173 will come into play only after the documents are forwarded to the Magistrate along with a report, viz., the report contemplated under Section 173(2)(i) in accordance with sub-S. (5) of that Section. 58. In this connection, we wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d person is forwarded under this Section to make an order of detention of the accused to such custody, viz., whether judicial custody or police custody, as the Magistrate thinks fit, for a term not exceeding, l5 days as a whole. As per Sub-sections (3) and (4), the Magistrate authorising the detention of the accused to the police custody should record his reasons for so doing, and if the said Magistrate is other than the Chief Judicial Magistrate, he should forward a copy of his order with his reasons for making it, to the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Rule 76 of the Criminal Rules of Practice states that the Magistrates shall not grant remands to the police custody unless they are satisfied that there is good ground for doing so and shall not accept a general statement made by the investigating or other Police Officer to the effect that the accused may be liable to give further information, that a request for remands to Police custody shall be accompanied by an affidavit setting out briefly the prior history of the investigation and the likelihood of further clues which the police expect to derive by having the accused in custody, sworn by the investigating or other police officer, n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
