SUPREME COURT & HIGHCOURT Rulings on POLICE

More documents

Recommendations

Info

a court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such police stationwould have power to enquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter XIII. However,sub-section (2) of Section 156 makes the position clear by providing that no proceedingof a police officer in any such case shall at any stage be called in question on theground that the case was one which such officer was not empowered to investigate.After investigation is completed, the result of such investigation is required to besubmitted as provided under Section 168, 169 and 170. Section 170 specificity providesthat if, upon an investigation, it appears to the officer in charge of the police station thatthere is sufficient evidence Of reasonable ground of suspicion to justify the forwarding ofthe accused to a Magistrate, such officer shall forward the .accused under custody to aMagistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence upon 8' police report and to trythe accused. or commit for trial. Further, if the investigation officer arrives at theconclusion that the crime was not committed within the territorial jurisdiction of thepolice station, then FIR can be forwarded to the police station having jurisdiction overthe area in which the crime is committed. But this would not mean that in a case whichrequires investigation the police officer can refuse to record the FIR and/or investigate it.(emphasis supplied)A reading of Sections 177 and 178 CrPC would make it clear that Section 177 providesfor "Ordinary" place of enquiry or trial. Section 178, inter alia, provides for place ofenquiry or trial when it is uncertain in which of several local areas an offence wascommitted or where the offence was committed partly in one local area and partly in.another and where it consisted of several acts done in different local areas, it could beenquired -into or tried by a court having jurisdiction over early of such local areas.Hence, at the stage of investigation, it cannot be held that the SHO does not haveterritorial jurisdiction to investigate the crime.The legal position is well settled that if an offence is disclosed the court will not normallyinterfere with an investigation into the case and will permit investigation into the offencealleged to be completed. If the FIR, prima facie, discloses the commission of an offence,the court does not normally stop the investigation, for, to do so wou1d be to trench uponthe lawful power of the police to investigate into cognizable offences. It is also settled bya long course of decisions of the Supreme Court that for the purpose of exercising itspower under Section 482 Cr PC to quash an FIR or a complaint, the High Court wouldhave to proceed entirely on the basis of the allegations made in the complaint or thedocuments accompanying the same perse; it has no jurisdiction to examine thecorrectness or otherwise of the allegations.3
Hence, in the present case, the High Court committed a grave error in accepting thecontention of the respondent that the investigating officer had no jurisdiction toinvestigate the matters on the alleged ground that no part of the offence was committedwithin the territorial jurisdiction of the police station at Delhi. The appreciation of theevidence is the function of the courts when seized of the matter. At the stage ofinvestigation, the material collected by an investigating officer cannot be judiciallyscrutinized for arriving at a conclusion that the police station officer of a particular policestation would not have territorial jurisdiction. In any case, it has to be stated that in, viewof Section 178(c) CrPC, when it is uncertain in which of the several local areas anoffence was committed, or where it consists of several acts done, in different localareas, the said offence can be enquired into or tried by a court having jurisdiction overany of such local areas. Therefore, to say at the stage of investigation that the SHO,Police Station Pachim Vihar, New Delhi was not having territorial jurisdiction, is on theface of it, illegal and erroneous. That apart, Section 156(2) contains an embargo that noproceeding of a police officer shall be challenged on the ground that he has no territorialpower to investigate. The High Court has completely overlooked t'1e said embargowhen it entertained the petition of Respondent 2 on the ground of want of territorialjurisdiction.4
Page 1 and 2: SUPREME CO
Page 3 and 4: precedential value in terms of the
Page 5 and 6: Case Index:. Supreme CourtI "Sr." N
Page 7 and 8: :Sr. Name of the Case. . CitationLe
Page 9 and 10: Sr. Name 'of the Case CitationNo.22
Page 11 and 12: Case Index: High Court 'Sr. Name of
Page 13 and 14: Sr. Name of the CaseCitation.. No.
Page 15: Sr. Name of the CaseNo. -23 Sitaben
Page 22: FactsHeld1.2 : F.I.R. AND REGISTRAT
Page 25 and 26: 1.2 : F.I.R. AND REGISTRATION OF F.
Page 27: Facts1.2 : F.I.R. AND REGISTRATION
Page 31: FactsHeld1.2 : F.I.R. AND REGISTRAT
Page 34 and 35: FactsHeld1.2 : F.I.R. AND REGISTRAT
Page 37 and 38: would be accomplishing behind their
Page 40: y the power or colour of lawful aut
Page 44 and 45: Guidelines for Arrest : No arrest c
Page 47 and 48: Held1.4 : ARREST AND CUSTODYDirecto
Page 50: 1.4 : ARREST AND CUSTODYKultej Sing
Page 53 and 54: Charge of the Police Station. The O
Page 55: We direct all ranks of police and t
Page 59: forbidding escape is available, the
Page 62: friend of the person, who has been
Page 66: 1.6 : SEARCH AN9 SEIZUREState of Pu
Page 70 and 71:
and this provision does not mandate
Page 72 and 73:
Steps under Ss.52 and 57 to be take
Page 75 and 76:
1.7 : REMANDHeldC.B.I. vs Anupam J.
Page 78:
1.8 : CHARGE-SHEET - EFFECT OF DELA
Page 82 and 83:
Held1.8 : CHARGE-SHEETK. VEERASWAMI
Page 84 and 85:
months or the extended period. if a
Page 86 and 87:
1.8 : CHARGE-SHEETSharavan Baburao
Page 89 and 90:
1.2 : REGISTRATION OF F.I.R.1.9 : I
Page 91 and 92:
The expression "reason to suspect"
Page 93:
Section 156(1) has to culminate in
Page 96:
Facts1.9 : INTERVENTION BY THE EXEC
Page 100:
a final report to the effect that n
Page 103:
(1) The confession should be record
Page 107:
HeldThe geographical distance betwe
Page 110 and 111:
II.3 RECORDING OF DYING DECLARATION
Page 112 and 113:
11.4 : POLICE AS WITNESSFactsTahir
Page 114 and 115:
evidence, since they can be said to
Page 116 and 117:
11.5 : USE OF CASE DIARY IN TRIALHe
Page 118 and 119:
III.1 : RIGHT TO LIFE AND PERSONAL
Page 120 and 121:
suffered by reason of such failure.
Page 122 and 123:
111.1 : RIGHT TO LIFE AND PERSONAL
Page 124 and 125:
legal ambit and that they have not
Page 126 and 127:
IV.1 : EXTERNMENTFactsPrakash Sitar
Page 128 and 129:
IV.1 : EXTERNMENTSh. Rambhai alias
Page 130 and 131:
IV.1 : EXTERNMENTSitaben M. Thakore
Page 132 and 133:
IV. 1 : EXTERNMENTDater Gatar Sulem
Page 134 and 135:
IV.2 : POWER OF POLICE SURVEILLANCE
Page 136:
IV.2 : POWER OF POLICE SURVEILLANCE
Page 139:
FactsIV.A : PERMISSION TO ORGANIZE
Page 142:
IV.S. : LICENCING PLACES OF PUBLIC
Page 145 and 146:
IV.6 : DIRECTION FORPROVIDING POLIG
Page 147 and 148:
IV.7 : . LIMITATION IN COMPLAINT/SU
Page 149 and 150:
IV.7 : LIMITATIONIN COMPLAINT/SUIT
Page 151:
ace in a race-club cannot change th
show all

SUPREME COURT & HIGHCOURT Rulings on POLICE

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?