INVESTIGATION, INQUIRY AND TRIAL

“Investigation” has been defined under S. 2 (h) of the Criminal Procedure Code. It includes all the  proceedings under “the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973” for the collection of evidence conducted  by a Police officer or by any person (other than a Magistrate) who is authorized by a Magistrate. The  officer-incharge of a Police Station can start investigation either on information or otherwise (section  157 Cr.P.C.).  

The investigation consists of the following steps starting from the registration of the case:-  (i). Registration of the case as reported by the complainant u/s 154 Cr.P.C.,  

(ii). Proceeding to the spot and observing the scene of crime,  

(iii). Ascertainment of all the facts and circumstances relating to the case reported,  (iv). Discovery and arrest of the suspected offender(s),  

(v). Collection of evidence in the form of oral statements of witnesses (sections 161/162 Cr.PC.), in  the form of documents and seizure of material objects, articles and movable properties concerned in  the reported crime,  

(vi). Conduct of searches of places and seizure of properties, etc.  

(vii). Forwarding exhibits and getting reports or opinion from the scientific experts (section 293  Cr.P.C) (viii). Formation of the opinion as to whether on the materials collected, there is a case to  place the accused before a magistrate for trial and if so, taking necessary steps for filing a charge  sheet, and  

(ix). Submission of a Final Report to the court (section 173 Cr.P.C.) in the form of a Charge Sheet  along with a list of documents and a Memo of Evidence against the accused person(s).  

Case – In Adri Dharan Das v. State of W.B. , it has been opined that: “arrest is a part of the process  of investigation intended to secure several purposes. The accused may have to be questioned in detail  regarding various facets of motive, preparation, commission and aftermath of the crime and  connection of other persons, if any, in the crime.”  

 In Niranjan Singh v. State of U.P. , it has been laid down that investigation is not an  inquiry or trial before the Court and that is why the Legislature did not contemplate any irregularity  in investigation as of sufficient importance to vitiate or otherwise form any infirmity in the inquiry or  trial.  

 In S.N.Sharma v. Bipen Kumar Tiwari , it has been observed that the power of police to  investigate is independent of any control by the Magistrate.  

 In State of Bihar v. J.A.C. Saldanha , it has been observed that there is a clear cut and  well demarcated sphere of activity in the field of crime detection and crime punishment and further  investigation of an offence is the field exclusively reserved for the executive in the Police  Department. Manubhai Ratilal Patel v. State of Gujarat and Others,(2013) 1 SCC 314. 

The documentation for the Police investigation shall include the following papers namely :-  (a). First Information Report (section 154 Cr.P.C.),  

(b). Crime details form, – (I F.2) (c). Arrest / court surrender memo,  

(c). Arrest / court surrender memo,  

(d). Property seizure memo  

(e). Final Report Form (section 173 Cr.P.C.)  

Police Officer’s Power to Investigate Cognizable Cases  

Any officer-in-charge of a Police Station may, without the order of a magistrate, investigate any  cognizable case which a court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such station  would have power to inquire into or try under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. 1973.  

Note : The courts have no control in such cases over the investigation or over the action of the Police  in holding such investigation. Where the offence takes place during night time, the investigation  officer should bring out in his investigation the existence of light at the time of the incident. For this,  he should clearly bring out the position of Electricity post / lights (public place or private place) in  the rough sketch of the scene of occurrence or the scene of crime to be drawn on the crime details  form. While recording the statements of witnesses of the occurrence or the observation mahazar  witnesses, the facts relating to the availability of light at the spot should be highlighted.  

Refusal of Investigation  

(1). The following principles are laid down to guide the exercise of their discretion by Station House  Officers in the matter of refusing investigation under section 157 (1) (b) of the Criminal Procedure  Code.  

(2). The investigation may be properly refused in the following cases:-  

(a). Triviality:- Trivial offences, such as are contemplated in section 95 of the Indian Penal Code. “  Nothing is an offence by reason that it causes or that is intended to cause, or that it is known to be  likely to cause any harm, if that harm is so slight that no person or ordinary sense and temper would  complaint of such harm”.  

(b). Civil Nature:- Cases clearly of civil nature or in which complainant is obviously endeavouring  to set the criminal law in motion to support a civil right.  

(c). Petty thefts:- Cases of petty theft of property less than Rs. 10/- in value, provided that the  accused person is not an old offender, nor a professional criminal, and that the property does not  consist of sheep or goats. 

(d). Injured person not wishing an inquiry:- Unimportant cases in which the person, injured does  not wish inquiry, unless (i) the crime is suspected to be the work of a professional or habitual  offender or (ii) a rowdy element (iii) the investigation appears desirable in the interests of the Public.  

(e). Undetectable simple cases:- Simple cases of house-breaking or housetrespass and petty thefts of  unidentifiable property, is none of which cases is there any clue to work upon or any practical chance  of detection, provided that there is nothing to indicate that the offence has been committed by a  professional criminal.  

(f) Exaggerated assaults:- Assault in cases which have been obviously exaggerated by the addition  of the other charges such as theft.  

Report to be sent in case of Refusal of Investigation  

When an investigation is refused, at once a First Information Report only need be submitted to the  court with copies usually sent to others, specifically indicating in the FIR format under column 13 – “ACTION TAKEN” that “the above report reveals commission of offences under section  …………………….., but  

falling under the categories of triviality or civil nature or petty theft or injured person not wishing to  have an inquiry or undetectable simple case or exaggerated assault coupled with theft, was registered  in crime number ……… and investigation ‘REFUSED’. It is also stated that further report will not be  submitted, under section 157 (1) (a) (b) and (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. “When  information as to the commission of any such offence is given against any person by name and the  case is not of a serious nature, the officer-in-charge of a Police Station need not proceed in person or  depute a subordinate officer to make an investigation on the spot ;” “ If it appears to the officer-in charge of a Police Station that there is no sufficient ground for enquiring on an investigation, he shall  not investigate the case;” “ The officer-incharge of the Police Station shall state in his report his  reasons for not fully complying with the requirements, “the officer shall also forthwith notify to the  informant, if any, in such manner as may be prescribed by the State Government, that fact that he will  not investigate the case or cause it to be investigated.” Note (i). The Station House Officer, after  registering a case of trivial nature under appropriate sections of the law and the connected  circumstances and refusing investigation of that case, shall give a copy of the FIR to the informant or  the complainant and obtain an acknowledgement in the counterfoil copy of the FIR. (ii). The SHO  will not send any further report of such cases including the final report under section 173 Cr.P.C.  

Refusal of Local Investigation  

The power to abstain from local investigation under section 157 (1) (a) of the Criminal Procedure  Code is primarily intended to be exercised in cases which are complete on the information brought to  the station, requiring no further enquiry. 

Investigation to be Impartial  

Investigating officers are warned against prematurely committing themselves to any view of the facts  for, or against a person. The aim of the investigating officer should be to find out the truth and to  achieve this purpose, it is necessary to preserve an open mind throughout the Inquiry.  

Further Investigation  

The mere undertaking of a further investigation either by the investigating officer on his own or upon  the directions of the superior police officer or pursuant to a direction by the Magistrate concerned to  whom the report is forwarded does not mean that the report submitted under Section 173 (2) is  abandoned or rejected. It is only that either the investigating agency or the court concerned is not  completely satisfied with the material collected by the investigating agency and is of the opinion that  possibly some more material is required to be collected in order to sustain the allegations of the  commission of the offence indicated in the report. Vipul Shital Prasad Agarwal v. State of Gujarat  and another, (2013) 1 SCC 197. 

INQUIRY 

According to S. 2(g)”inquiry” means every inquiry, other than a trial, conducted under this Code by a  Magistrate or Court.  

Case – The word Inquiry has been defined u/s 2 (g), Cr.P.C. It is evident from the Provision that  every Inquiry other than a trial conducted by the Magistrate or Court is an Inquiry. No specific mode  or manner of inquiry is provided u/s 20, of the code. In the inquiry envisaged u/s 202, Cr.P.C.  examination of the complainant only is necessary with the option of examining the witnesses  present, if any. This exercise by the Magistrate, for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is  sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, is nothing but an Inquiry envisaged u/s 202.  

An inquiry is basically a proceeding wherein the magistrate or court applies the judicial mind and the  purpose of such judicial mind is to determine whether further proceedings moving towards the trial  shall be taken or not. Inquiry as a stage of criminal process commences with the cognizance taken by  magistrate u/s 190. However the filing of complaint or the police report whereupon the magistrate  applies his mind on the point whether he shall take cognizance or not will also be deemed to be a  part of the stage of inquiry.  

The inquiry proceedings moves uptill the stage of commencement of charge framing. Thereafter with  the charge of framing the trial process starts. During an inquiry some important proceedings that can  be taken place in the inquiry. For Example :  

1.Taking of Cognizance  

2.Complaint proceeding  

3.Dismissal of complaint  

4.Issue of process  

5.Handing over of documents 

6.Fixation of date for 1st hearing etc.  

TRIAL  

Trial has three basic stages, which normally occur in the same order. Investigation (where evidences  are to be collected), Inquiry (A judicial proceeding where judge ensures for himself before going on  trial, that there are reasonable grounds to believe the person to be guilty) and trial. The term trial has  not been defined in the CrPC, however is commonly understood to mean – a judicial proceeding  

where evidences are allowed to be proved or disproved, and guilt of a person is adjudged leading to a  acquittal or a conviction.  

Trials are normally divided into Warrant Trials and Summons Trials. A criminal trial starts with  framing of charges, if a person is not discharged- trial begins, by framing of charge and reading and  explaining to him. After framing of charges the judge proceeds to take the “plea of guilt” which is an  opportunity to the accused to acknowledge that he pleads guilty and does not wish to content the  case. Here the judge’s responsibility is onerous, he has to, first ensure – plea of guilt is free and  voluntary. Secondly – he has also to ensure that if there had been no plea of guilt – was the  prosecution version if unrebutted- would have led to conviction. If both the requirements are met – then judge can record and accept plea of guilt and convict the accused after listening to him on  sentence  

After plea of guilt is taken, if accused pleads “not guilty” or court does not accept his plea of guilt,  trial moves on- prosecutor then explains to the court the basic outline of the case and what evidences  he proposes to lead in order to prove the same. He ask the court to summon witnesses so that court  can record their evidence. As the prosecution has to start leading evidence to bring home the offence  to the accused – it is said “The Burden of Proof lies on the Prosecution”. The basic rule is whoever  asserts the affirmative of an issue has the burden to prove facts on which the accused’s liability  depends, and this burden of proof – is not a light burden – the prosecution has to prove that the  accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubts. This is primarily for two reasons:  

1.A person’s (accused’s) life and liberty is involved.  

2.And the state with the investigative machinery at its disposal is sufficiently armed to get good  evidence which an individual would not have.  

So since now the burden of proof is on the prosecution it has to prove facts which incriminate the  accused. When witnesses for the prosecution are called they are first examined by the prosecutor – then cross examination by the defence advocate, and with the leave of court prosecutor can again  examine to clarify the loopholes exposes during toss.  

After the prosecutor has led its evidence – court asks the accused to himself enter the witness box but  in order to explain circumstances that appeared against him – he has given an opportunity to give  personal explanations. This is a remarkable manifestation of Audi Alteram Partem where the court  makes a direct dialogue with the accused to know what his take is. This is not a chance to the court  to bequile or cross examine the accused. Any answer given by accused is not to be used as evidence  against him but the court may take into consideration to adjudge overall trustworthiness of the case.  This is done u/s 311 CrPC, after the examination. If the court feels that prosecution has not 

successfully brought home the guilt – it may acquit – else if it feels that they have sufficiently  discharged their burden – then it asks defence if it seeks to lead evidence, and the same cycle again.  Now after evidence from both sides is recorded. Parties then make arguments on the same, and in the  end court pronounces the judgement.  

In case of Acquittal the accused is set at liberty. In case of conviction – the punitive dilemma begins.  The court has to fix another hearing to decide on the quantum of sentence. Here the prosecution as  well as the defence can lead evidences that would have been fatal earlier, in order to aggravate or  mitigate the punishment. Here the court gives equal leverage to the “Crime” as well as the  “Criminal”. Earlier the gravity of crime used to be the sole criteria – however in recent times, there  has been a definitive shifts of focus from crime to criminal which manifests growing importance of  reformation at the end of punishment. The court at this stage would also consider whether the  accused is entitled to the benefits of probation or admonition.  

DISTINCTION BETWEEN INVESTIGATION, INQUIRY AND TRIAL 

Investigation, inquiry and trial are three different stages of a criminal case. The case is first  investigated by the police to ascertain whether an offence has actually been committed and if so, by  whom and the nature of evidence available for the prosecution.  

Inquiry is the second stage which is conducted by a Magistrate for the purpose of committing the  accused to sessions or discharging him when no case has been made out. In case of complaints made  to a Magistrate, it refers to a preliminary inquiry made by him under Section 202 to ascertain the  truth or falsehood of the complaint or whether there is any matter which calls for investigation by a  criminal court.  

The final stage of the case comes when the accused is put on trial before the Sessions Judge or the  Magistrate when he is empowered by law to try the cases himself.  

Investigation and Inquiry :  

(1)An investigation is made by a police officer or by some person authorized by a Magistrate but is  never made by a Magistrate or a court. An inquiry is a judicial proceeding made by a Magistrate or  a court.  

(2)The object of an investigation is to collect evidence for the prosecution of the case, while the object  of an inquiry is to determine the truth or falsity of certain facts with a view to taking further action  thereon.  

(3)Investigation is the first stage of the case and normally precedes enquiry by a Magistrate.  Inquiry and Trial :  

Both inquiry and trial are judicial proceedings, but they differ in the following respects:  (1) An enquiry does not necessarily mean an inquiry into an offence for, it may, as well relate to  matters which are not offences, e.g., inquiry made in disputes as to immovable property with regard 

to possession, public nuisances, or for the maintenance of wives and children. A trial on the other hand,  is always of an offence.  

(2) An inquiry in respect of an offence never ends in conviction or acquittal; at the most. It may  result in discharge or commitment of the case to sessions. A trial must invariably end in acquittal or  conviction of the accused.