Maharashtra National Law University Mumbai

Program: BA.,LL.B.(Hons) Semester V

Course: Law of Crimes II Code

Teaching Scheme Evaluation scheme

Internal Continuous Assessment

Lecture Practical Tutorial Credit
(ICA) (Weightage)

60 Hrs 4 50 Marks

Objectives –
 To familiarize the students with the crucial aspects relating to investigation and trial
of offences (like initiation of criminal cases, powers and duties of police during
investigation of offences, stages of criminal trial, functions, duties, and powers of
criminal courts)
 To sensitize the students about critical issues in administration of criminal justice (like
protection of human rights of accused, victims, principles of fair trial)
Outcomes – At the end of the course, the students will be able to:
 Identify the stages in investigation and procedure of trial in criminal cases
 Explain the powers, functions, and duties of police and criminal courts
 Critically analyze the recent amendments in the Cr PC
 Employ and promote adoption of humane and just practices in administration of
criminal justice
Pedagogy –It shall be culmination of various teaching learning method like Socratic,
seminar, presentation, case law, workshop, analyze agreements etc.

Unit/Module Description Duration

I Introduction of Cr.P.C. 10
 Importance of Criminal Procedure
 Stakeholders and Functionaries in the Criminal
 Justice Administration
 Hierarchy, powers and duties of Criminal Courts
 Definitions- Sections 2(a), (g), (h), (w), (wa), (x),
etc.
II Investigation - Ss. 157, 41-41D, 46-47, 93, 50-50A, 51-53, 10
53A, 54-54A, 55A, 56-57, 60A.
Arrest – procedure and rights of arrested person
Search and seizure (sections 165, 166 read with section
100)
III Bail- Ss. 436 - 439 of the Cr PC. 10
 Grant of Bail, including anticipatory bail
 Cancellation of Bail
 Compulsory release
IV Pre-Trial Proceedings - Ss. 190, 193, 199, 200, 202, 204, 5
209-224, 228.

 Cognizance of Offences
 Committal Proceedings
 Framing of Charges

V Trial - Ss. 2(w) (wa) and (x), 225-226, 230-231, 233-234, 10

242-244, 251, 260, 262 of the Cr PC.

 Differences among warrant, summons, and

summary trials
 Production of Witnesses - Summons and warrants
 S.321-Withdrawal of Prosecution

VI Rights of Accused and Victims 10

 Features of Fair Trial – Ss.273, 300, 303-304, 313,

316, 317, 319, 321,
 327, 406, 409; Articles 20 (1) (3), 22(1), 39A of the
Constitution
 Rights of Victims – Ss.357, 357A, 357B, 357C,
372, Proviso
 Witness Protection - Delhi High Court Guidelines
for Protection of Vulnerable Witnesses.

VII Judgment - Ss. 227, 229, 232, 235 353-355 of the Cr PC 5

  Discharge and acquittal
 Conviction
 Hearing on sentence
 Content of judgments

Other Means of Disposal of Cases - Ss. 265A-265L, 320,

360-361 of the CrPC.

 Plea Bargaining
 b. Compounding of cases

Essential Readings:

Books
 K.N.Chandrsekharan Pillai (Rev.), R. V. Kelkar’s Criminal Procedure, (7th ed.,
2021).
 K.N.Chandrsekharan Pillai (Rev.), R. V. Kelkar’s Lectures on Criminal
 Procedure, (6th ed., 2017).
 Chandrasekharan Pillai, Kelkar Lecturer on Criminal Procedure, 1998 Eastern
Book Co.
 Ratan Lal & Dheeraj Lal, Cr.PC, Universal, Delhi
 Woodroffe, Commentaries on Cr.P.C, 2000 Universal
Cases

 Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, 2008 (11) SCALE 154

 Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, 2008 (11) SCALE 157
 Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, 2013 (13) SCALE 559
 Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, Crl.M.P. no.5029 of 2014 in Writ Petition
(Crl.) No.68 of 2008
 Youth Bar Association of India v. Union of India, (2016) 9 SCC 473
 State of Orissa v. Sharat Chandra Sahu, (1996) 6 SCC 435
 Madhu Bala v. Suresh Kumar, (1997) 8 SCC 476
 Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2008) 2 SCC 409
 Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya v.State of Gujarat, 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1346
 D.K.Basu v. State of West Bengal, (1997) 6 SCC 642
 State of Haryana v. Dinesh Kumar, (2008) 3SCC 222
 Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273
 State v. Captain Jagjit Singh, (1962) 3 SCR 622
  Moti Ram v. State of M.P., (1978) 4 SCC
 Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.), (1978) 1 SCC
 Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2012)1 SCC
 Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565
 Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1
 State (Delhi Administration) v. Sanjay Gandhi, (1978) 2 SCC 411
 Gautam Navlakha v. National Investigation Agency, 2021 SCC 382
 Mohan Singh v. State of Bihar, (2011)9 SCC 272
 Ajay Kumar Parmar v. State of Rajasthan, (2012) 9 SCALE 542
 Abdul Karim v. State of Karnataka, (2000) 8 SCC 710
 Zahira Habibulla H. Shiekh v. State of Gujarat,(2004) 4 SCC 158
 Mohammed Hussain v. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi),(2012) 9 SCC 408
 Mohd. Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra,(2012) 9 SCC 1
 Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab,(2014) 3 SCC 92
 Mehmood Nayyar Azam v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2012) 8 SCC 1
 Mrs. Neelam Katara v. Union of India, ILR (2003) II Del
 Ajay Pandit @ Jagdish Dayabhai Patel v. State of Maharahtra, (2012) 8 SCC 43
 Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303

Any other information:

Specific assessments / methods Weightage

Continuous assessment in percent

Mid-term Examination 20

Project 30

Final Examination 50

Total 100

Course taught by: Abhsihek Negi

Investigation - Ss. 157, 41-41D, 46-47, 93, 50-50A, 51-53, 53A, 54-54A, 55A, 56-57, 60A.
Arrest – procedure and rights of arrested person

 Complaint: can be cognizable (no permission of magistrate required) and non-

cognizable (has to be permitted by the magistrate)
 Based on degree of offence: cognizable is non-bailable or bail on discretion while
non-cognizable offences are bailable.
 Inquiry: By the magistrate includes findings and fact checking before the trial for the
framing of charges
 Investigation: By the police. Collection of direct and circumstantial evidence.
 Trial: Charges have to be framed and a judgement needs to be passed.
 Crime- FIR- Investigation-chargesheet-magisterial inquiry-Issuing of processes-
framing of charges-trial
 Constitution of criminal courts: Police-Magistrate- Prosecutors/defense lawyers-
prison authorities
 Police: lodges FIR, Fact finding. There is territorial domain.
 Hierarchy of courts: chapter 2 (Section 6 to 25) and 3 (Section 26-35)
 Chapter 2: Sec. 6 (Classification of criminal courts)
- Court of sessions
- JM First class/ Metropolitan Magistrate
- JM Second class
- Executive Magistrate: under the supervision of state gov. The rest are under the
supervision of the HC.
- Court of session: Session’s judge- Additional sessions judge- Asst. sessions judge
- Session’s judge and additional sessions judge have the same powers the only
difference is seniority or administrative power. Additional sessions judge is
subordinate to both of them.
- MM: in metropolitan areas. A state which has population exceeding 10 lakhs.

Powers of Criminal Courts (Chapter 3 S. 26 to 35)

- S. 26: Courts by which offences are tried.

- Two types: offences under IPC and offences under other laws.
- Offences under IPC: HC, Court of sessions or. Courts mentioned under first
schedule.
- Proviso: S. 376- the court should be presided by a lady judge.
- Offences under other laws: court specifically mentioned then it has the power. If
no court is mentioned then HC or the court mentioned under the first schedule (4 th
column)
- S. 27: offence not punishable by death or life imprisonment and the accused was
16 or below when he was brought before the court, then this person will be tried
by the CJM or any other court empowered by the statute.
- However, this has become obsolete because of the JJ act which deals with the
trials of juveniles.
- S. 28: Sentencing power of HC and COS. The limit of imprisonment or fine that
can be imposed by a court.
- HC: any sentence as authorized by law.
- Sessions judge and additional sessions judge: same powers to both. Any sentence
authorized by law. Death sentence has to be confirmed by the HC u/s 366 of
CrPC. Hence this power is not absolute.
- Asst. Sessions Judge: can pass any sentence authorized by law except: Death, life
imprisonment and imprisonment exceeding 10 years.
- S. 29: Sentencing powers of magistrate.
- CJM/ACJM/CMM: Up to 7 years
- CMM: Same powers as CJM.
- JM (1st class)/metropolitan mag.: up to 3 years and fine 10k
- JM (2nd class): up to 1 year and fine 5k.
- S. 30: Imprisonment in default of fine. A person was given imprisonment and fine
both and he is unable to pay the fine the what can the court do in such situations.
In such a case, additional imprisonment can be awarded to the person.
- This is in addition to the punishment.
- Clause 2: addnl imprisonment is in addition to the powers u/s 29.
- Eg: Theft: 3 years u/s 379. JMFC- 3 years allowed. Punishment: 3 years and 5k
fine. However, this person fails to pay 5k. then, u/s 30 of CrPC, there can be
additional imprisonment for 2 months. Now total is 3 years 2 months which
exceeds the power of the JMFC. However, section 30 (2) protects the JMFC from
exceeding his powers as ascertained under section 29.
- Maj. Can exceed the limit but by how much: given in the proviso-
- (a) provided that the term is not in excess of powers u/s 29.
- Eg: theft 3 years
- 3 yrs + 5k = okay – but unable to pay the same. Then the court can award
additional imprisonment.
- 3 yrs + 1 year /2/3/- all this is permissible because the sentencing power of the
mag is 3 yrs u/s 29.
- However, 3 yrs + 4 yrs- not allowed because it is in excess of his powers. Mag
cannot exceed his power as provided u/s 29.
- Proviso (b)- term shall not exceed 1/4th of the term of competence.
- Eg: killing of cattle: 5 years u/s 429 IPC. JMFC: 3 years jail and 7k fine: however,
the convict was found to be unable to pay such a fine: hence, additional
imprisonment. It will be 1/4th of the powers given u/s 29.
- Hence, 3 years will be 9 months- hence, 1/4th of 3 years and the additional
imprisonment can be for only 9 months which is 1/4 th od 3 years which is the limit
of the sentencing power of JMFC u/s 29.
- Section 31: several offences at one trial.
- Two cases: consecutive and concurrent. Generally, they run consecutively unless
expressly mentioned in the judgment that they have to run concurrent.
- Eg: A threatened to kill B and also there was simple hurt. Section 506 and 332:
same trial. Both have the punishment of 1 year. General rule: consecutively:
which means: 1 yr for 506 and then another year for 332: 2 years In total.
However, concurrently: 1 year- both the punishments will run parallel to each
other.
- Clause 2: 3 offences- JMFC 1st class: powers: 3 years. If the consecutive
punishment exceeds the power of the JMFC u/s 29 then also, it would not be sent
to a higher court. This sentence can go beyond the powers of the Mag. If the
aggregate of the punishment is more than the given power.
- The aggregate can exceed double his powers. Hence, JMFC can give a
punishment upto 6 years (3*2)
- Therefore, if its 8 years then JMFC cant inflict this punishment however it can
inflict a punishment upto 6 years.
- The aggregate punishment cannot exceed 14 years.
- Cases: section 30 and 65 which would take precedence and section 31:
interpretation of life
- Definitions- Sections 2(a): Bailable offence- made bailable in the first schedule or
made bailable by some other law.
- 2(g): Inquiry: every inquiry other than a trial conducted under this code by a
magistrate.
- 2(h): investigation: all proceedings under this code for collection of evidence
conducted by police or any other person.
- 2(w): summons case: a case relating to an offence not being a warrant case.
- 2(wa): victim- person who has suffered loss or injury by any act or omission for
which the accused has been charged.
- 2(x): warrant case: cases relating to offences punishable with death, imprisonment
for life or a term exceeding two years.
- INVESTIGATION AND ARREST
- Ss. 157, 41-41D, 46-47, 93, 50-50A, 51-53, 53A, 54-54A, 55A, 56-57, 60A.

- Mandatory Registration of FIR- Supreme Court Guidelines in Lalita Kumari

Case : Section 154 CrPC
- A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P
[W.P.(Crl) No; 68/2008] held that registration of First Information Report is
mandatory under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , if the
information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary
inquiry is permissible in such a situation. If the information received does not
disclose a cognizable offence but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a
preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain whether cognizable
offence is disclosed or not. The Supreme Court issued the following Guidelines
regarding the registration of FIR.
- (i) Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the
information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary
inquiry is permissible in such a situation.
- (ii) If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence but
indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted
only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not.
- (iii) If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the FIR
must be registered. In cases where preliminary inquiry ends in closing the
complaint, a copy of the entry of such closure must be supplied to the first
informant forthwith and not later than one week. It must disclose reasons in brief
for closing the complaint and not proceeding further.
- (iv) The police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering offence if cognizable
offence is disclosed. Action must be taken against erring officers who donot
register the FIR if information received by him discloses a cognizable offence.
- (v) The scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracity or otherwise
of the information received but only to ascertain whether the information
reveals any cognizable offence.
- (vi) As to what type and in which cases preliminary inquiry is to be conducted
will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. The category of cases in
which preliminary inquiry may be made are as under:
- (a) Matrimonial disputes/ family disputes (b)Commercial offences
(c) Medical negligence cases (d)Corruption cases
- (e) Cases where there is abnormal delay/laches in initiating criminal prosecution,
for example, over 3 months delay in reporting the matter without satisfactorily
explaining the reasons for delay. The aforesaid are only illustrations and not
exhaustive of all conditions which may warrant preliminary inquiry.
- (vii) While ensuring and protecting the rights of the accused and the complainant,
a preliminary inquiry should be made time bound and in any case it should not
exceed 7 days. The fact of such delay and the causes of it must be reflected in the
General Diary entry.
- (viii) Since the General Diary/Station Diary/Daily Diary is the record of all
information received in a police station, we direct that all information relating to
cognizable offences, whether resulting in registration of FIR or leading to an
inquiry, must be mandatorily and meticulously reflected in the said Diary and the
decision to conduct a preliminary inquiry must also be reflected, as mentioned
above.
- RIGHTS OF AN ARRESTED PERSON
- FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS: Rights of an arrested person under Article
22(1)

1. An arrested person shall not be detained in custody without being informed of

grounds of arrest
2. An arrested person o shall not be denied the right to consult and to be
defended by a legal practitioner of his choice Rights of an arrested person
under Article 22(2)
3. An arrested and detained person o shall be produced before nearest magistrate
within 24 hours of arrest excluding journey time from place of arrest to court
4. No person shall be detained in custody o beyond the said period of 24 hours
without authority of a magistrate
- STATUTORY RIGHTS [granted by the Code of Criminal Procedure]:
 Sections 41B: Arrested person has to be informed that he has a right to have a
relative or a friend informed of his arrest
  Section 41D: Arrested person is entitled to meet an advocate of his choice
during interrogation
 Section 49: Arrested person shall not be subjected to more restraint than is
necessary to prevent his escape
 Section 50: Arrested person has to be informed of grounds of arrest and of his
right to bail
 Section 50A: Arrested person shall be informed of his right that a person
nominated by him shall be informed of his arrest
 Section 56: Arrested person shall be produced before a Magistrate without
delay
 Section 57: Arrested person shall not to be detained for more than 24 hours
without authorization by a Magistrate
- LEGAL RIGHTS OF ARRESTED PEOPLE AS DECLARED BY
SUPREME COURT
- DK BASU GUIDELINES
Hon’ble Supreme Court has issued a detailed guidelines about the arrested persons
in the landmark case Dilip K. Basu v. State of West Bengal decided in 1997. The
same is of utmost utilization for people who is suffering from false cases of 498A,
Rape, Molestation, Dowry Death and many more.
1. The police personnel carrying out the arrest should bear accurate, visible and
clear identification and name tags with their designations.
2. The police officer carrying out the arrest shall prepare a memo of arrest and
such memo shall be attested by at least one witness, who is either a member of
the family of the arrestee or a respectable person of the locality from where the
arrest is made. It shall be countersigned by the arrestee
3. A person who is being held in custody shall be entitled to have one friend or
relative or other person known to him informed that he has been arrested and
is being detained at the particular place.
4. The time, place of arrest and venue of custody of an arrestee must be notified
by the police telegraphically within a period of 8 to 12 hours after the arrest.
5. The person arrested must be made aware of this right to have someone
informed of his arrest or detention as soon as he is put under arrest or is
detained.
6. An entry must be made in the diary regarding the arrest which shall also
disclose the name of the next friend who has been informed of the arrest.
7. The arrestee should be examined at the time of his arrest and major and minor
injuries, if any present on his/her body, must be recorded at that time.
8. The arrestee should be subjected to medical examination every 48 hours.(9)
The arrestee may be permitted to meet his lawyer during interrogation, though
not throughout the interrogation.
ARNESH KUMAR GUIDELINES
In sum and substance, allegation levelled by the wife against the appellant
(husband) was that demand of Rupees eight lacs, a maruti car, an air-
conditioner, television set etc. was made by her mother-in-law and father-
in-law and when this fact was brought to the appellants notice, he
supported his mother and threatened to marry another woman. It has been
alleged that she was driven out of the matrimonial home due to non-
fulfilment of the demand of dowry. The petitioner apprehended his arrest
in a case under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and
 Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The maximum sentence
provided under Section 498-A IPC is imprisonment for a term which may
extend to three years and fine whereas the maximum sentence provided
under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is two years and with fine.
His attempt to secure anticipatory bail has failed and hence he has
knocked the door of supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition.

- After discussing the provisions related to safeguard against arrest, the

court laid down guidelines to be followed in arrest. The court directed-

 All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to

automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is
registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under
the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41, Cr.PC;
 All police officers be provided with a check list containing specified
sub- clauses under Section 41(1)(b)(ii); The police officer shall forward
the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which
necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before
the Magistrate for further detention;
 The Magistrate while authorising detention of the accused shall peruse
the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only
after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorise detention;
 The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate
within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy
to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of
police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing;
 Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41A of Cr.PC be served on the
accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which
may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the
reasons to be recorded in writing;
 Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from
rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental
action, they shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of
court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction.
 Authorising detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the
judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by
the appropriate High Court.
 The directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under
Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,
the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with
imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which
may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine.

JOGINDER SINGH GUIDLIENS

The court found that without a valid complaint and a thorough investigation, an
arrest cannot be undertaken based on a simple accusation of an offense against a
person or in a regular manner. According to his constitutional rights, a person may
not be detained simply on the basis of a suspicion that he assisted in a crime, and
 he may not be detained until a reasonable conclusion has been made about the
validity of the complaint. All arrests must comply with the aforementioned
conditions up until additional legal arrangements are established on their behalf.
In several police manuals, it was indicated that certain conditions should be added
to the rights of those who had been arrested. The prerequisites listed here are not
all-inclusive.

Facts: SSP continued to have custody of the petitioner.

- The petitioner’s brother inquired about the petitioner, but he was misinformed and
told that the petitioner will be freed that evening after looking into a matter.
- The petitioner’s brother wrote a telegram to the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh
on January 7, 1994, at 12:55 p.m., expressing alarm over his brother’s
imprisonment in connection with a criminal matter and further implying that the
petitioner had been killed in a staged encounter.
- On the evening of January 7, 1994, word spread that the petitioner was being held
against his will by the SHO of Mussoorie.
- The petitioner was kept in jail to do additional research in a case on January 8,
1994, according to the information provided. The petitioner has not yet been
brought before the relevant Magistrate. Instead, the SHO of Mussoorie instructed
the petitioner’s family to speak with the SSP of Ghaziabad for the petitioner’s
release.
- When the petitioner’s brother and a few other family members visited the
Mussoorie Police Station that evening on January 9 to inquire about the welfare of
their brother, they learned that the petitioner had been brought to an unspecified
location.
- The police claimed that because the advocate was collaborating with them in a
case involving kidnapping, he had been released and there was no reason to keep
him in custody.

ISSUE(S)

When and on what grounds can an arrest be made?

The Honourable Court set the following rules to ensure the efficient execution of such
fundamental rights:

1. A person who has been arrested and is being kept in custody has the right, upon
request, to have one friend, relative, or another person who is familiar to him or likely
to be interested in his welfare informed of his arrest and the location of his detention.
2. When the arrested person is brought to the police station, the police officer must tell
him of this privilege.
3. The person who received notice of the arrest must be noted in the journal. These
safeguards under Articles 21 and 22(1) must be carefully upheld

PROCEDURE OF INVESTIGATION

- Investigation comes if motion as soon as FIR is launched.

- Procedure for investigation S. 157: any cognizable offence is registered with the
magistrate. There shall be immediate intimation to the magistrate. Mag is
 empowered to take cognizance of such offences and order subordinate officers to
investigate and take necessary measures for discovery and arrest of accused.
- The investigation commences from this section. Kari Devi vs. Sita Choudhary:
purpose of investigation: figure out if the alleged crimes has taken place or not. If
yes, collect all evidences around it.
- If the crime is not of grievous nature then the police need no carry forward the
investigation immediately. The reason has to be recorded and handed over to the
magistrate.
- Accused may leave signals: fingerprints, eyewitnesses, murder weapons etc. all
this is to be recorded by the police.
- Major problem: evidence destroyed, what is and is not relevant etc.
- Who may investigate: police officer- restricted to police authorities. Neither open
to court or accused have the right to question the investigation.
- A report stating whether an offence has been committed or not can be submitted
by the IA to the mag to further take cognizance of the same.
- If there is no sufficient material then Mag can either accept the report or order for
further investigation.
- IA commences: when there is reason to suspect the commission of a cognizable
offence. There should be reason to suspect and sufficient reason to believe that a
cognizable offence has been committed.
- Investigation in cognizable cases: Sec. 156 (1): can investigate without order.
Violation of the same is curved out in sub section 2.
- If there is a defect or illegality: only when there is miscarriage of justice- then the
trial can be vitiate and conviction can be set aside.
- Mag gets the report: can dispose of it or issue process or apply his mind ro take
action under Section 190.
- S. 157(1): procedure for arrest. If from the information received, an officer has
reported the same to the mag and he is empowered to take cognizance then the
case should be investigated upon and arrest of the offended shall be made.
- Proviso 1: case is not of serious nature or it is a name FIR then the officer can
dispense investigation by recoding reasons.
- Second proviso: 2008 amendment: women police officer required for
investigation at the residence of a rape victim.
- 18 years of less (female victim) Infront of parents or social worker.
- Occurrence report: report of a cognizable report sent to the mag by thr police
officer.
- Object: mag gets to know about the serious crime as soon as possible so that he
can issue directions under section 159.
- Non-cognizable offences: cannot investigate w/o the permission of the magistrate.
- However, when he gets permission, all powers are the same as cognizable cases
except power to arrest.
- Two cases and one is cognizable then the case is treated as a cognizable offence
only.
- 190: empowers the Mag to take cognizance upon receiving any complaint or upon
police report or information received other than the police who has knowledge
about the crime.
- Tula Ram vs. Kishori Singh: investigation can only be ordered at pre-cognizance
stage.
- Safeguard provisions for Arrest
- If there is some information or a reasonable complaint (less than or up to 7 years)
the police have to record the reasons in writing for making an arrest. A detailed
account as to why the arrest has been made has to be given by the police. Number
of arrests also have been recorded: w or w/o warrant, how many bails have been
given etc.
- There needs to be a visible identification mark. 41(B)
- Memorandum of arrest needs to be signed by the witness and counter signed by
the witness.
- Family and friends should be informed about the arrest. – 50(A)
- police headquarters in the district and state level to maintain the record of arrests.
– 41(C).
- Arrested person has the right to meet the advocate during interrogation but not
throughout interrogation – 41(D)
- To maintain the person custody, reasonable force to be applied if trying to escape
or confine himself and under no other circumstances. – 46 and 49.
- Women can only be arrested by a women officer.
- Right to be informed about the reasons of arrest. If arrest w/o warrant then all
particulars need to be told to him immediately.
- Medical examination of the accused: in service of state or central gov. record the
examination and make a report which is furnished to the arrested person (Section
54)
- Health care and safety of the accused in custody needs to be taken care of: Section
55(A)
- Accused has to be taken to the magistrate w/o delay: Section 56
- No detention after 24 hours unless special orders are given under section 167:
Section 57
- Officer of the station should report to the DM or SDM about all arrests w/o
warrant and other details: Section 58
- All the safeguards need to be strictly followed: Section 60 (A).

NOTES

Glitch between sections 65 and 30

- Section 65: limit to imprisonment for non-payment of fine which is 1/4th of the
maximum punishment in IPC. However, section 30 talks about the capacity of the
powers of a magistrate. Therefore, a glitch is created.
- Chajjulal vs. State of Rajasthan: higher court reversed the lower courts position
that section 30 can be waived off in place of section 65. Sometimes, the actual
 imprisonment maybe less than the fine. Hence, this may get overruled by the
higher courts.
- Bidhan vs state of Orissa: there is no conflict between sections 65 and 30. Sec. 65
is the general rule while 30 is special hence restrictive.
SECTION 31
- Mutthuramalingam vs State (2016): Tussle between section 31 and 427. Decided
by a 3 judge’s bench. Whether consecutive life sentence can be awarded to a
convict on being found guilty for a series of offences tried in a single trial.
- Appellant cases: Om Cherian vs State of Kerala (2015) and Duryodhan Rut vs.
State of Orissa (2015): punishment cannot be consecutive and interpreted life as
the remaining period of time.
- Respondent case: Kamal Nath vs. St. of Tamil Nadu, Samanullah vs state of
Bihar: stuck to the normative interpretation and said that it is upto the court to
decide.
- The court upheld the appellants arguments and held that life should be interpreted
as remaining period of life. Hence, life sentence in both cases would be concurrent
only.
- Court of sessions does not come under this. However, Asst. COS comes under
this: has the discretion to decide which punishment will run first.
ARREST
- Section 46: how arrest is made- touching, confining and walking with. There
should be reasonable force.
- Who can arrest: section 41: police may arrest w/o warrant. If the crime is
committed in his presence and is of cognizable nature.
- Arrest on refusal to give name and residence: more specific: does not talk about
offences. Also gives the provision of release after bond or correct info be given to
the authorities.
- Private individual: section 43: for non bailable cognizable offences. They have to
inform the police as soon as possible. Police can rearrest as per section 41 and 42.
- Magistrate: within his local jurisdiction can ask other persons to arrest
- Section 41 (A): notice of appearance before police officer: may was changed to
shall showing mandatory requirement.
- Section 53, 54: medical examination
- Nandani Sathpathy: the right of an accused person to be silent while police
interrogation in relation to Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution and Section
161(1) of the CrPC.
- BRIEF FACTS
- In this case the appellant was a former chief minister of Orissa. Certain
charges of corruption were levelled against her and in the course of
inquiry she was called upon to attend at a police station and to answer
certain written questions. The appellant refused to answer questions
and claimed the protection of article 20(3).
She was prosecuted under section 179 of IPC, for refusing to answer
 questions put by the lawful authority (the Deputy Superintendent of
Police, Vigilance Cuttack).
- On this the accused challenged the rationality of the power of the judicial
magistrate by moving to High Court under article 226 of the Indian Constitution
and section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code. But the High Court failed to answer
the limit of section 161(2) of the criminal procedure code when an accused
imposed article 20(3) during police interrogation because of which the plea of the
appellant was rejected. And on receiving a certificate she appealed under article
132(1) in the Supreme Court.
- ISSUES RAISED
- Is a person likely to be accused of crimes i.e. a suspect accused,
entitled to the sanctuary of silence as one ‘accused of any offence’?
- Appearance before courts
- Summons: issued by courts to parties to appear before court for first intimation.
- Warrants: issued by court to a law enforcement agency to authorize them for a
specific action.
- Proclamation: declaration to the society that the person is wanted by the
police/court. If a proclamation also fails then, newspaper, putting a notice on
ordinary residence. Last option is attaching property.
- Chapter 6
- Summons: it has to be written and in a particular format with the signature of the
court. A duplicate is served and the original is kept as proof. The other copy
maybe signed by someone else for surety. Object is humble intimation and
information to appear.
- Who will execute summons: court, police u/s 41 can only issue notice. Courts can
take assistance of police, court officials or public servants.
- Against whom it can be issued: accused, witness, medical expert, adult male
member of the family.
- Publication of FIR in public domain: Young India Association vs UOI.
-