Section 173 of criminal procedure code. CrPC Section 173 2023-01-01
Section 173 of criminal procedure code Rating:
8,1/10
899
reviews
Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) is a crucial provision that deals with the investigation process in criminal cases in India. It outlines the duties and powers of the police during the investigation of a crime, and also provides a framework for the submission of the police report to the court.
Under Section 173, the police are required to investigate any cognizable offense that is brought to their notice, either through a complaint or on their own initiative. A cognizable offense is one for which the police have the power to make an arrest without a warrant and to begin an investigation without the permission of a court. The investigation process may involve the collection of evidence, the questioning of suspects and witnesses, and the recovery of stolen property.
During the investigation, the police have the power to arrest a suspect, search and seize property, and summon witnesses to appear before them. They are also required to record all statements made by witnesses, suspects, and other persons during the course of the investigation.
Once the investigation is complete, the police are required to submit a report to the court. This report, known as the charge sheet, outlines the evidence collected during the investigation and contains the names of the accused, the witnesses, and the nature of the offense. The charge sheet serves as the basis for the prosecution of the accused in court.
In cases where the police are unable to complete the investigation within a period of 90 days, they may seek an extension of time from the court. However, this extension can only be granted in exceptional circumstances and must be justified by the police.
In summary, Section 173 of the CrPC plays a vital role in the criminal justice system in India. It outlines the duties and powers of the police during the investigation process and provides a framework for the submission of the police report to the court. It is an important provision that helps ensure that criminal cases are properly and fairly investigated, and that justice is served.
What is a challan?
In this context, the Supreme Court in Ramlal Narang v. This right to bail does not get revived only because further investigation is pending in terms of sub-section 8 of Section 173, Cr. C with respect to one another accused namely Shri Bhaumik against whom no charge-sheet has been filed till date. Hence, the present appeal. Sub-section 8 of Section 173 clearly envisages that on completion of further investigation, the investigating agency has to forward to the Magistrate a further report and not fresh report regarding the further evidence obtained during such investigation. As the law does not require it, we would not burden the Magistrate with such an obligation While dismissing the Criminal Appeal, the Bench further observed: We are of the opinion that as such no error has been committed by the High Court dismissing the application submitted by the appellant herein to implead him in the Special Criminal Application filed by the private respondent herein challenging the order passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate rejecting his application for further investigation under Section 173 8 Cr. However, where the collected materials were misunderstood by the investigating officer and new light was thrown by the superiors, the I.
ADVERTISEMENTS: Charge sheet must state the offence or offences committed and who committed them. If the complainant files a petition saying that real culprits were not included in the final report or there is lacuna in the investigation which will cause failure of justice and if the Magistrate after considering the matter comes to the prima facie conclusion that proper investigation was not conducted, he is not helpless, the Magistrate will be free to order further investigation to avoid failure of justice. The prosecution prayed for recording the statement of the victim girl herself which the trial Court permitted. CASE BACKGROUND In the Present case, The respondent lodged the FIR against the appellant and others. The Allahabad High Court held that since allegations of corruption were against police officer, Government was fully justified in entrusting further investigation and the petitioner accused had no locus standi to raise objection. The police present its final report before the Magistrate or Court under Section 173 2 only.
The Supreme Court in State of West Bengal v. In certain circumstances, further investigation is permitted even after the final report is submitted to the court under subsection 8 of this section, even if the magistrate has taken cognizance of the offense. C by the police as well as the Trial Court are available provided the need for exercise of such power arises on finding any fresh evidence or about culpability of any other accused. It said: Therefore, when the proposed accused against whom the further investigation is sought, namely Shri Bhaumik is not required to be heard at this stage, there is no question of hearing the appellant-one of the co-accused against whom the charge-sheet is already filed and the trial against whom is in progress and no relief of further investigation is sought against him. All those provisions have been kept as to what items will be included in the final police report and whether there will be space in the report and when the report will be presented. Therefore, merely because the additional statements which are recorded subsequent to the filing of the charge-sheet were allowed by the Additional Sessions Judge and that too before framing of the charges cannot be said to be arbitrary or improper exercise of jurisdiction by the learned A. Declaration about Consultation with a Lawyer:- To comply with regulations stipulated by the Bar Council of India that does not permit solicitation in any form or manner, by accessing this site www.
Section 173 (8) Cr. P. C; Courts Not Obliged To Hear Accused While Considering Plea For Further Inve
Therefore, the High Court is absolutely justified in rejecting the application submitted by the appellant to implead him as a party respondent in the Special Criminal Application. If the Magistrate agrees with the final report, he may accept it and close the proceedings. The Supreme Court set aside the order and restored the case directing the Magistrate to proceed with the case in accordance with Section 210 of Cr. That, thereafter the respondent filed an application before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad Rural under Sections 173 8 and 156 3 CrPC for further investigation against Shri Bhaumik. Therefore, while disposing of the aforesaid Criminal Appeal, the Court observed that if the respondent has any objection against dropping of one another accused, he may file objection and can file a protest petition in the Trial Court. The officer in charge of the police station under section 157 of the CrPC transmits the initial report of the case to the magistrate.
Therefore, the petitioners could not be added as additional accused on the basis of supplementary charge-sheet submitted by the police under Section 173. The power of the investigating officer to make a prayer for making further investigation in terms of sub-section 8 of Section 173 is not taken away only because a charge-sheet under sub-section 2 thereof has been filed. In the instant case, submission of a proforma as envisaged in Section 173 2 by police without any accompaniments as envisaged in Section 173 5 did not indicate complete of investigation. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent preferred the Special Criminal Application before the High Court of Gujarat. The statement of mother was recorded in course of investigation but she died during the trial of the case. In the case of Hardeep Singh v. Sub-section 5 of section 173 clearly states that the prosecution will run on the basis of the evidence which may also contain any items.
Report of police officer on completion of investigation: The Code of Criminal Procedure provides for certain reports which the investigating police officer is required to send from time to time. Sub-section 8 provides that the submission of the final report by the officer-in- charge of the police station to the Court under Section 173 2 does not preclude further investigation of the case by the investigating agency where deemed necessary. Therefore, the High Court is absolutely justified in rejecting the application submitted by the appellant to implead him as a party respondent in the Special Criminal Application. A further investigation is permissible even if order of cognizance of offence has been taken by the Magistrate. During the hearing of the aforesaid appeal, there was progress in the investigation and the charge-sheet was filed against the accused Yagnesh Vyas and Sanjay Shah who were also arrested. The Court have already found that the prosecution agency can make further investigation to find whether the accused against whom a charge-sheet has already been filed can be booked for other offences and some other accused persons can also be brought to the books of rules.
The High Court of Madras in Rangnathan v. State, held that in a case in which the complainant and the accused, both filed complaints against each other, but the police in its final report to the Magistrate did not refer to the complaint filed by the accused and his statement. Held that cognizance could not be taken on such a one-sided report and the accused was liable to be set at liberty because he was deprived of his right of proper projection of his defence. Those things have been clearly mentioned under sub-section 2 of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. From a plain reading of sub-section 2 and sub-section 8 of Section 173, it is evident that even after submission of police report under section 2 on completion of investigation, the police has a right to further investigation under sub-section 8 of Section 173 but not fresh investigation' or reinvestigation. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 24. The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against the mother-in-law.
Section 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.)
If an accused is absconding, whose name is under prosecution, then sub-section 8 of section 173 is used in the context of such absconding accused and the investigation is continued. There was also no evidence to show that the Investigation Officer was in any way biased towards the complainant. It is filed so as to enable the court concerned to apply its mind as to whether cognizance of the offence thereupon should be taken or not. A charge sheet was filed against the mother-in-law on this basis. Casting of any such obligation on the court would only result in encumbering the court with the burden of searching for all the potential accused to be afforded with the opportunity of being heard. C to suggest that the Court is obliged to hear the accused before any direction for further investigation is made.
