Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CRPC Assignment
CRPC Assignment
Introduction
This article covers Investigation, Inquiry and trial along with the mode of
taking and recording evidence, its provisions and cases along with acquittal of
the person again for the same offence, appearance by public prosecutors,
permission to conduct a prosecution along with their provisions to give a
detailed view to the reader.
Investigation, Inquiry and Trial
An investigation is the first step taken by the police officer. in any matter of
offence and the culprit thereof. Inquiry includes everything done by a
Magistrate, irrespective of whether the case has been challenged or not. A trial
is a judicial proceeding that ends either with conviction or acquittal.
Chapter XXIV of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with the general
provisions of Inquiries and trials. Inquiries and trials are just two stages out of
the various stages that help in deciding the due course of a criminal nature.
Investigation
Investigation has been defined under Section 2(h) of CrPC. Investigation
includes all the proceedings under the Code required for the collection of
evidence. It is conducted by a Police Officer or by any person other than a
magistrate, who has been authorized by the magistrate on this behalf.
Steps of Investigation
• Proceeding to the spot where the offence has been committed.
• Ascertain the facts and circumstances of the case.
• Discovery and arresting the suspected offender.
• Collecting evidence of the offence that may consist of:
o Examination of various persons (including accused) and
reduction of his statement into writing, if it is deemed fit by the
officer.
o The search and seizure that are considered necessary for
investigation and to produce before trial.
Commencement of Investigation
There are two ways to commence the investigation:
• The police officer in charge has the authority to investigate when the FIR
is lodged.
• When the complaint has been made to the Magistrate then any person
who has been authorized by the Magistrate can investigate in this regard.
Malafide Investigation
If investigating agencies conduct mala fide investigation, then it is open to
correction by invoking the jurisdiction of the High Court.
In this case, the Investigating Officer and the Station House Officer had
received information about a murder from an unknown place. It was held that
before the investigation commences a Magistrate should take cognizance of
the offence.
In this case, it was observed by the court that etymologically, the meaning of
term investigation is that which includes any process involving sifting of
materials or search of any relevant data for the purpose of ascertaining facts
in issue in a matter in hand.
Inquiry
An inquiry is done either by a Magistrate or it is done by the Court but not by
a police official. Investigation differs from inquiry.
Inquiry includes all the enquiries that are conducted under this code but it does
not include the trials that are conducted by a Magistrate.
The cases which are triable by the Session Court, the commencement of their
proceedings take place before a Magistrate. The proceedings can be in the
nature of an inquiry preparatory to send the accused for trial before the court
of Session.
Magistrate also conducts an enquiry in the cases which are triable by himself
under Section 302 of CrPC. If a complaint is filed before a Magistrate, the
Magistrate examines the witnesses and the complainant on an oath to find out
if there is any matter for the investigation that has to be carried out by a
criminal court.
If the Magistrate distrusts the statement made by the complainant and the
witnesses, the Magistrate may dismiss the complaint.
The result of the investigation or inquiry does not establish sufficient ground
to proceed with the case. All these proceedings are done in the nature of the
inquiry.
Trial
The Code of Criminal Procedure does not define the term trial. A trial is a
judicial proceeding that ends in either a conviction or acquittal but does not
discharge anyone. It is examination and determination by a judicial tribunal
over a cause which has jurisdiction over it.
The trial begins in a warrant case with the framing of the charge when the
accused is called to plead thereto. In a summons case, it is not necessary to
frame a formal charge, the trial starts as soon as the accused is brought before
the magistrate and the particulars of the offence are stated to him. The case
which is exclusively triable by a session court, there the trial begins only after
committal proceedings done by the Magistrate. Appeal and revision are
included in the term trial, they are a continuation of the first trial.
In a criminal trial, the function of the court is to find out whether the person
who is produced before the court as accused, is guilty of the offence with
which he has been charged. To hold that the accused is guilty of the offence
with which he has been charged, the purpose of the court is to scan the
material on record to find out whether there is any trustworthy and reliable
evidence on the basis of which it is possible to find the conviction of the
accused.
Section 275(1)– In all the warrant cases, the evidence of each witness shall
be in writing by Magistrate or under his direction if the Magistrate is unable to
do so due to some physical or other incapacities, under his direction and
superintendence, by the officer of the court who is appointed by the Magistrate
on his behalf. The evidence under this subsection is to be recorded by audio-
video electronic.
Marking of Exhibits
Some evidence shall be submitted by the prosecution, this evidence has to be
marked with the number in the order in which they are submitted. The
documents that are admitted on behalf of defence shall be marked with capital
letter alphabets. If in case neither party does not accept the evidence then the
evidence shall be marked as Ext C-I, C-II etc.
If more than one number of documents are of similar nature, then the small
letter or small number is added in order to distinguish each document in the
series. After the evidence is proved and admitted it shall be marked with a
Roman number. Example MO-I, MO-II etc. the bench clerk of the court shall
prepare the list of articles which shall be signed by the Judge.
Cases
Javer Chand and Ors. V. Pukhraj Surana, 1961
In this case, it was held that the Court does not proceed further whenever an
objection is raised in the court without passing any order on such an
objection. If there is an objection on the stamp duty of a document, then
objection will be decided then and there before proceeding further.
In this case that accused was convicted for an offence under Section 302 of
IPC and was subjected to a death sentence. The conviction was set aside
evidence was not recorded in his presence, later the case was remanded back
for trial.
This case was reported in 1990 Criminal Law Journal. In this case, the accused
was facing trial u/s 379 of IPC. During the time of examination, the lawyer
who was representing the accused was not present and the personal
attendance of the accused was dispensed with. The entire trial was held to be
vitiated by the High Court, as the examination was conducted in gross violation
of the mandatory provision of Section 273 of CrPC.
Whereas, a plea of autrefois convict means that a person cannot be tried for
an offence for the reason that he has been convicted previously in the same
offence and such a plea combined with a plea of not guilty.
Section 300 of CrPC is based upon the maxim “nemo debet bis vexari” which
means that a person shall not be brought into danger more than once for the
same offence.
Section 221(1) provides that if there is a doubt on the facts of the case, as to
what offence has been committed, the accused may be charged with all such
offences or any of such offences or he may be given alternative charge of
committing any one of such offences.
Section 221(2) provides that if the accused has been charged with one offence,
and it appears from the evidence that he has committed a different offence,
the offence for which he might have been charged under Section 221(1), he
may be convicted of the offence committed by him, though he might not have
been charged with that offence.
In this case, there was a criminal trial for offences under The Terrorist and
Disruptive Activities (Prevention) (TADA),1985 Act now The Prevention of
Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA), and offences under IPC. The subsequent trial for
the offences under TADA was barred as they were based on the same facts
and the conviction of the accused was set aside in the subsequent trial.
Section 220(1) of CrPC provides that if one series of acts connected together
to form the same transaction if more than one offence is committed by the
same person, he may be charged with and tried at a trial for each such offence.
If a person has been convicted of any offence and for another offence, a
separate charge could have been made, but it was not made in the formal trial
against the accused, the accused is not liable to be tried again for another
offence as a matter of course because this itself might lend to abuse. Thus,
due to this reason the later part if this section envisages the provision that
there should be prior consent of State Government before going for a second
trial. It is required by the State Government to give consent only after due
consideration of facts and circumstances of the case with a view of the
promotion of justice.
Section 300(3) only uses the words “a person convicted” and not acquitted.
Therefore, the rule does not apply in situations where the person has been
acquitted.
Illustration
Illustration
X is tried for robbery by a first-class Judicial Magistrate. Later on, the same
facts he is charged with the offence of dacoity. In this case, since a Judicial
Magistrate of first class cannot try the subsequent offence of dacoity as it is
triable only by a court if it is a Sessions court, hence, the subsequent trial of
X irrespective of whether he has been convicted or acquitted, will not get
barred.
In this case, it was held that under Section 409 of IPC there cannot be any
prohibition to a trial and a conviction, in a case where the accused had been
tried and acquitted of an offence under Section 52 of The Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1947 that has been constituted on identical facts.
In this case, it was observed by the Court that the Public Prosecutors are
ministers of justice whose duty is to assist the judge in the administration of
justice.
Section 24(4)– The District Magistrate in consultation with the Session Judge
has to prepare a panel of names that are considered fit for such an
appointment.
Section 24(6)– Explains a case where a state has a local cadre of the
prosecuting officers, if in the cadre there is no such suitable person for an
appointment, the appointment must be made from the panel that is prepared
under subsection 4.
Section 24(7)– The person can be appointed as a Public Prosecutor only after
practising as an Advocate for a minimum 7 years period.
The District Magistrate may appoint any other person in absence of Assistant
Public Prosecutor to act as an Assistant Public Prosecutor.
• If the accused is proven guilty then the Public Prosecutor and the defence
counsel argue further to decide the quantum of the punishment.
• The prosecutors have a responsibility to call upon all the witnesses whose
evidence is an essential element in deciding the case. They also have to
cross-examine the witness and make sure that no witness is left
unexamined and to produce all necessary documents.
Cases
• Vineet Narain v.Union of India, 1997
In this case, high political dignitaries were involved. There was a failure in the
investigation by the CBI. The Court held that there are no restrictions or
limitations in launching prosecutors to initiate the investigation proceedings.
Section 302 of CrPC and two Judgements of the Supreme Court of M/s J.K.
International vs. State, Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors. are the answer to the
proposition that a trial by a Magistrate, a complainant or any other person in
addition to a Public Prosecutor can assist the Court and can also participate in
the conduct of a trial. The Supreme Court also adhered to the law of the land
binding on all Courts.
In this case, the Supreme Court held that the scope of allowing any private
person who is intending to participate in the conduct of prosecution is wider
under Section 302. If the court thinks that on a request of a party, the cause
of justice could be served better if such permission is granted then such
permission should generally be granted by the Court.
In this case, it was held that the scheme under the Code indicates that a person
aggrieved of an offence is not altogether wiped out from the trial scenario,
merely on the ground that the investigation was Section 225 carried out by
police and the charge sheet was laid by them. The fact that the Court had
taken cognizance of the offence, even this is not sufficient to debar him from
reaching the court to ventilate his grievance.
Even in the Sessions Court where the only authority is the Public Prosecutor,
is empowered to conduct prosecution under Section 225 of the Code. A private
person aggrieved of an offence who is involved in the case is not debarred
altogether from participating in a trial.
The private person who has the permission to conduct prosecution in the
Magistrate Court can engage a counsel on his behalf to do the needful.
If the Court is of the opinion that the justice can be served better if such
permission is granted then generally such permission is granted by the Court.
This wider amplitude is limited to Magistrate Courts, as the private person’s
right to participate in the Session Court for the conduct of prosecution is
restricted as it is subject under the control of the Public Prosecutor.
Conclusion
The article describes investigation, inquiry and trial, provisions related to the
mode of taking and recording evidence, the acquittal of the person for the
same offence, an appearance by the public prosecutor and permission to
conduct a prosecution, their provisions under the Code along with related
cases.
References
1. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1238795/
2. https://www.mondaq.com/india/Criminal-Law/692100/Prosecution-Of-
Criminal-Case-In-Court-By-The-Complainant-Sec-302-Of-CrPC.
3. The Code Of Criminal Procedure by Justice YV Chandrachud and VR
Manohar- Ratanlal and Dheeraj Lal- 16th edition 2002.