Whether Supreme Court order of extending the Limitation Period also extends the time limit for filling Charge -Sheet?

•  Supreme Court in its order passed suo-mot on 23-03-20 extended the time limit for filling of various applications, appeals etc in Courts due to prevailing covid-19 situation.
• The confusion arose when various High Courts starts giving contradictory orders on extension of time for filling charge-sheet as given in section 167 Cr.P.C. interpreting that the order of Supreme Court also extends the time for filling charge sheet beyond the period of 90 or 60 days as the case may be and accused has no right to be released on default bail because of the extending the period by Supreme Court.
• In case of Kasi vs State through inspector of police Madurai Crl. Appeal No. 452/2020 decided on 19 June 2020 Supreme Court clarified the position and held that 
• " neither this court in its order dated 23-03-20 can be held to have eclipsed the  time prescribed under section 167(2) Cr.P.C. nor the restriction which have been imposed during the lock down by the government shall operate as any restriction on the rights of the accused as protected by section 167(2) cr.p.c regarding his right to be released on default bail"
• So with the above clarification by the Supreme Court it become clear that there is no extension of time for filling charge-sheet it remains as it is in section 167 Cr.P.C. i.e.90/60 days as the case may be  and if not filled within the time period accused has a right to be released on default bail.

Ownership of Motor Vehicle- Legal Implications of not transferring R.C. of vehicle

Most of us who are having motor vehicle at one point of time use to sell our vehicle and it is generally done by executing a sale deed and get it registered by Notary Advocate and consequently we deliver the possession of vehicle to buyer along with the Registration certificate and other documents. Generally we don't bother about the transfer of vehicle's registration certificate and some times it comes with heavy cost.

In case the vehicle met with an accident or involved in some other case and the R .C. of the vehicle is not transferred yet. you will be considered as owner of the vehicle for all purposes.

The Supreme Court in its Judgement in Civil Appeal 2632 of 2020 decided on 18 June 20 , Surendra kumar Bhilawe vs New India Insurance Company Limited  held  that till the time ownership is not transferred by entering the name of new owner in registration certificate, the person on whose name the registration certificate is considered as owner of the vehicle for all purposes.

GUIDELINES FOR INVESTIGATING UNNATURAL DEATH CASEs UNDER SECTION 174 Cr.P.C.

Guidelines for investigation of Unnatural Death cases

It is seen as a matter of practice that after the investigation of U.D. cases registered under section 174 of Cr.P.C. police after conducting the investigation submits the report to the magistrate who is devoid of any power to accept or reject the police report further the executive magistrate is not empowered by the Cr.P.C. to grant any relief to the informant who wants to proceeds against the conclusion/ report of the police. In most of the cases the family member even do not know the result of investigation of U. D cases.  It is pertinent to note that the provisions are made in Cr.P.C. where inquest is to be conducted by the Ex. Magistrate on the information given by police regarding unnatural death. The proceeding conducted by the magistrate is in addition to the inquest conducted by the police and Ex. Magistrate is supposed to report its finding to the police.

The Madras High Court in case of Manohari and others vs DSP Shivgangai Crl. OP 15515 and 11764 decided on 17/09/2018 issued following guidelines for investigating U.D.cases

 a) The Police on receipt of an information about the suspicious death shall registered an F.I.R under Section 174 of Criminal Procedure Code and thereafter he can proceed to the scene of occurrence and prepare an Inquest Report.

b) When a Police Officer receives an information to the effect that the deceased is lying in a serious condition, he can rush to the scene of occurrence, in order to see if he can save the victim and if in case the victim does not survive he can proceed to prepare the Inquest Report in accordance with Section 174(1) of Cr.P.C, and thereafter register an F.I.R under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. The Inquest Report has to describe the wounds, fractures, bruises and other marks of injuries as are found on the dead body and state in what manner, or by what weapon or instrument [if any], such marks appear to have been inflicted.

c)The Police Officer shall also prepare a Rough Sketch of the place of occurrence.

d)The Inquest Report and the Rough Sketch shall be prepared in the presence of two or more respectable inhabitants of the neighborhood.

e) The object of the Inquest Proceedings is merely to ascertain whether a person has died under unnatural circumstances or an unnatural death and if so, what is the cause of death. The Inquest Report need not contain details such as how the deceased was assaulted or who assaulted him or under what circumstances he was assaulted and these facts are not within the scope of Inquest Proceedings and they fall within the scope of the investigation to be conducted by the Police.

f)immediately after the preparation of the Inquest Report in accordance with Section 174(1) of Criminal Procedure Code, the Police shall submit the same to the Executive Magistrate under Section 174(2) in order to enable the Executive Magistrate to hold an independent inquest as contemplated under Section 174(4) of Criminal Procedure Code.

g) The Executive Magistrate on completion of the inquest shall submit a report to the Police and such report shall form part of the investigation conducted by the Police and the Police shall collect details from such report and conduct the investigation accordingly.

h) The power of the Police to investigate is in no way stopped or curtailed or interfered with by the inquest held by the Executive Magistrate and the freedom of the Police to proceed with the investigation will be left untouched.

i)The Police on the conclusion of the investigation shall file a Final Report under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C only before the jurisdictional Magistrate and not before the Executive Magistrate. This will apply, in both cases, whether the Final Report is a positive report or is a Closure Report.

j) If in case the Police proceeds to file a Closure Report, the victim shall be entitled to be served with a R.C.S notice in order to enable him to file a protest Petition before the concerned Magistrate.

k) On such protest Petition being filed, the concerned Judicial Magistrate shall act in accordance with law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vinay Tyagi .Vs. Irshad Ali, reported in [2013 (5) SCC 762].

PROCEDURE FOR PROSECUTION OF OFFENCES FROM SECTION 172 TO 188 I.P.C.

Section 195 of Cr.P.C. bars Court to take cognizance of offences from section 172 to 188 IPC except on the complaint in writing made by the public servant whose order is disobeyed or any other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate.

Further section 340 Cr.P.C. provides special procedure for prosecution of offences  of section 172 to section 188 of I.P.C and provides that on the basis of complaint filed by the public servant whose order is disobeyed the jurisdictional magistrate takes cognizance in section 343 and proceeds as the case if is instituted on police report.

Since offence of section 188 IPC is cognizable the police has authority to arrest the person under section 41 of the Cr.P.C. 

The confusion arises on power of police to register the FIR .  Though there are some conflicting views of High Court but the view expressed by the Madras High Court in case of Jeevanandam  vs State  represented by Police Inspector , Cri. O.P. number1356/2018 decided on 20 September 2018 Madras High Court is more convincing and is according to the provisions of Cr.P.C.

The  High Court issued following direction to be followed in case of prosecution of offences of section 188 IPC

a)A Police Officer cannot register an FIR for any of the offences falling under Section 172 to 188 of IPC.

b)A Police Officer by virtue of the powers conferred under Section 41 of Cr.P.C will have the authority to take action under Section 41 of Cr.P.C., when a cognizable offence under Section 188 IPC is committed in his presence or where such action is required, to prevent such person from committing an offence under Section 188 of IPC.

c)The role of the Police Officer will be confined only to the preventive action as stipulated under Section 41 of Cr.P.C and immediately thereafter, he has to inform about the same to the public servant concerned/authorised, to enable such public servant to give a complaint in writing before the jurisdictional Magistrate, who shall take cognizance of such complaint on being prima facie satisfied with the requirements of Section 188 of IPC.

d)In order to attract the provisions of Section 188 of IPC, the written complaint of the public servant concerned should reflect the following ingredients namely;

i) that there must be an order promulgated by the public servant;

ii) that such public servant is lawfully empowered to promulgate it;

iii)that the person with knowledge of such order and being directed by such order to abstain from doing certain act or to take certain order with certain property in his possession and under his management, has disobeyed; and

iv)that such disobedience causes or tends to cause;

(a) obstruction,annoyance or risk of it to any person lawfully employed; or

(b) danger to human life, health or safety; or

(c) a riot or affray.

e)The promulgation issued under Section 30(2) of the Police Act, 1861, must satisfy the test of reasonableness and can only be in the nature of a regulatory power and not a blanket power to trifle any democratic dissent of the citizens by the Police.

f)The promulgation through which, the order is made known must be by something done openly and in public and private information will not be a promulgation. The order must be notified or published by beat of drum or in a Gazette or published in a newspaper with a wide circulation.

g)No Judicial Magistrate should take cognizance of a Final Report when it reflects an offence under Section 172 to 188 of IPC. 

An FIR or a Final Report will not become void-ab-initio insofar as offences other than Section 172 to 188 of IPC and a Final Report can be taken cognizance by the Magistrate insofar as offences not covered under Section 195(1)(a)(i) of Cr.P.C.

h)The Director General of Police, Chennai and Inspector General of the various Zones are directed to immediately formulate a process by specifically empowering public servants dealing with for an offence under Section 188 of IPC to ensure that there is no delay in filing a written complaint by the public servants concerned under Section 195(1)(a)(i) of Cr.P.C.

ATTACK ON DOCTORS, HEALTHCARE WORKERS TO BE COGNIZABLE AND NON-BAILABLE OFFENCE UNDER EPIDEMIC DISEASES ACT 1897 AS AMENDED BY EPIDEMIC DISEASES ACT AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 2020

The Central government promulgated Epidemic Diseases Act amendment ordinance 2020 to amend the Epidemic Diseases Act 1897 to make attacks on doctors and healthcare workers a cognizable and non-bailable offence.

Whoever commits or abets the commitment of violence against health care worker, shall be punished with imprisonment ranging from 3 months to 5 years, and penalty ranging from Rs 50,000 to 2 lakh.

In case of a very serious attack, the imprisonment may be for a minimum period of 6 months and maximum of 7 years, with penalty ranging from Rs 1 lakh to 5 lakh.

As per the Ordinance, investigation into the incidents of attacks on doctors and healthcare workers has to be conducted by police officer not below the rank of inspector and shall be completed within 30 days from the date of registration of FIR.

Trial of these cases shall also be conducted in a time-bound manner, and endeavors to be made to decide within one year.

The Ordinance also provides that the court shall presume that such person has committed such offence, unless the contrary is proved.

The Ordinance states that in case of damage to vehicles or clinics of doctors or healthcare workers, the perpetrators would have to pay double the market cost of the damaged asset as compensation.

Upon failure to pay the compensation awarded, such amount shall be recovered as an arrear of land revenue under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890

District Council to try the criminal cases committed within the autonomous district where both the parties are Scheduled Tribe irrespective of the fact that in criminal cases ‘State” is considered as dejure complainant

• The Supreme Court while deciding the issue observed that as per section 1 of the Cr.P.C. the provisions of the Cr.P.C. other than those related to chapter VII, X and XI are not applicable to the tribal areas in the State of Meghalaya including Khasi Hills District unless State has issued any notification implementing the provisions of Cr.P.C. and in absence of any such notification.
• Supreme Court further observed that”
•  Under the 6th Schedule to the Constitution, Paragraphs 4 and 5 deal with the administration of justice in Autonomous Districts and Autonomous Regions referred to in paragraph 2 of the 6th Schedule. As mentioned supra, paragraph 4(1) accords the District Council or Regional Council, as the case may be, with the power to constitute Courts to  exclusively  try suits and  cases where all parties thereto belong to Scheduled Tribes within such areas. This, however, does not apply to those suits and cases that are covered by paragraph 5(1) of the 6th  Schedule, wherein the Governor may confer on the District or Regional Council, or the courts set up by a District Council, or on any officer appointed by the Governor in that behalf, such powers under the Cr.P.C. or the Code   of   Civil   Procedure   (‘C.P.C.’)   as   the   Governor   deems appropriate. Further, paragraph 4(4) stipulates that Courts setup by the District Council are to function in accordance with the procedure evolved by the rules made by the District Council or Regional Council, as the case may be. 

• In   the   instant   case,   in   exercise   of   powers   under paragraph 4(4) of the 6th Schedule to the Constitution, the United Khasi Jaintia   Hills   Autonomous District administration of Justice) Rules, 1953 were adopted. Rule 9 here under provides for the constitution of one District Council Court for the Khasi Hills Autonomous District and for the appointment of judges thereto.      
• In exercise of such powers under Rule 9 and paragraph 5(1)   of   the   6th  Schedule,   a   notification   was   published   on 07.02.2017, vide which the Governor of Meghalaya appointed an Additional   Judge   to   the   District   Council   Court,   Shillong and conferred her with powers for the trial of offences punishable with death, transportation for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than five years under the IPC or any other law applicable in the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council. 
• Reading paragraph 4 and 5 of the 6^th schedule together only the District Council Courts has the exclusive jurisdiction to try the case which falls in their jurisdiction and as per the provisions of The United Khasi, Jaintia Autonomous Hills District ( Administration of Justice Rules 1953.
• (The State of Meghalaya vs Melvin Sohlangpiaw, SPL(Cri) 1218/2018 decided on 11 February 2020)

Procedure to be adopted by police in interstate arrest - Delhi High Court Guidelines

 In case of Sandeep Kumar vs State of (NCT) Delhi, W.P (Crl.) No.2189/2018 decided on 12/12/2019, expressing their serious concern the Court directed for the implementation of guidelines proposed by the Committee constituted by the court when it comes to the procedure of inter-state investigation or arrest by the police and also directed to take action against police officers violating the provisions of law and awarded compensation to the petitioner

The procedure proposed is based, inter alia, on Sections 48, 77, 79 and 80 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The guidelines proposed by the Committee include the following:

Primary procedure to be followed by Police Officers

·         The Police Officer after assignment of the case to him, must seek prior permission/sanction of the higher/superior officers in writing or on phone (in case of urgency) to go out of State/UT to carry out investigation.

·         In a case when the police officer decides to effect an arrest, he must set out the facts and record reasons in writing disclosing the satisfaction that arrest is necessary for the purpose of investigation.

·         He should move the Jurisdictional Magistrate to seek arrest/search warrants under Section 78 and 79 Cr PC except in emergent cases when the time taken is likely to result in escape of the accused or disappearance of incriminating evidence or the procurement of arrest/search warrant would defeat the purpose. The Police Officer must record reasons as to what were the compelling reasons to visit other State without getting arrest/search warrants.

·         Before proceeding outside the State, the police officer must make a comprehensive departure entry in the Daily Diary of his Police Station. It should contain names of the police officials and private individuals accompanying him; vehicle number; purpose of visit; specific place(s) to be visited; time and date of departure.

·         If the possible arrestee is a female, a lady police officer be made part of the team.

·         The Police Officers should take their identity cards with them. All police officers in the team should be in uniform; bear accurate, visible and clear identification and name tags with their designations.

·         Before visiting the other State, the Police Officer must endeavour to establish contact with the local Police Station in whose jurisdiction he is to conduct the investigation. He must carry with him the translated copies of the Complaint/FIR and other documents in the language of the State which he intends to visit.

·         After reaching the destination, first of all, he should inform the concerned police station of the purpose of his visit to seek assistance and co-operation. The concerned SHO should provide/render all legal assistance to him. Entry to this effect must be made at the said police station.

·         After reaching the spot of investigation, search, if any should be strictly conducted in compliance of the procedure laid down u/s 100 Cr PC. All endeavour should be made to join independent public witnesses from the neighbourhood. In case of arrest, the police officer must follow the procedure u/s 41A and 41B and Section 50 and 51 Cr PC. The process of arrest carried out by the police must be in compliance with the guidelines given in DK Basu case (Supra) and the provisions of CrPC.

·         The arrested person must be given an opportunity to consult his lawyer before he is taken out of State.

·         While returning, the police officer must visit the local police station and cause an entry made in the Daily Diary specifying the name and address of the person(s) being taken out of the State; articles if any, recovered. The victim's name be also indicated.

·         On arrival at the police station, the police officer must make an arrival entry in the record and indicate the investigation carried out by him, the person arrested and the articles recovered. He should also inform his senior police officers/SHO concerned about it immediately. The superior Police Officer shall personally supervise such investigation.

·         Endeavor should be made to obtain transit remand after producing the arrestee before the nearest Magistrate unless exigencies of the situation warrant otherwise and the person can be produced before the Magistrate having jurisdiction of the case without infringing the mandate of S. 56 and 57 of Cr.P.C. within 24 hours.

Duties upon Magistrates

·         The magistrate before whom the arrestee is produced, must apply his mind to the facts of the case and should not grant transit remand mechanically. He must satisfy himself that there exists material in the form of entries in the case diary that justifies the prayer for transit remand. The act of directing remand of an accused is fundamentally a judicial decision. The magistrate does not act in executive capacity while ordering detention of the accused. He must ensure that requirements of S. 41 (l)(b) are satisfied.

·         The police officer must send the case diary along with the remand report so that the magistrate can appreciate the factual scenario and apply his mind whether there is a warrant for police remand or justification for judicial remand or there is no need for any remand at all. The magistrate should briefly set out reasons for his decision.

·         Another mandatory procedural requirement for the Magistrate considering a transit remand application is spelt out in Article 22 (1) of Constitution of India. This entitles the person arrested to be informed as soon as may be the grounds of such arrest.

·         The Magistrate has to ensure that the arrested person is not denied the right to consult and to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice. The Magistrate should ask the person arrested brought before him whether in fact he has been informed of the grounds of arrest and whether he requires to consult and be defended by any legal practitioner of his choice.

Other directions

·         In terms of Section 41C, CrPC, control rooms be established in every district. Names and addresses of the persons arrested and designation of the Police Officers who made the arrest be displayed. Control Room at State level must collect details of the persons so arrested.

·         The police officer must record all the proceedings conducted by him at the spot and prepare an 'arrest memo' indicating time, date of arrest and name of the relation/friend to whom intimation of arrest has been given. It must reveal the reasons for arrest.

·         Since the arrestee is to be taken out of his State to a place away where he may not have any acquaintance, he may be permitted to take along with him (if possible), his family member/acquaintance to remain with him till he is produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate. Such family member would be able to arrange legal assistance for him.

·         The arrested person must be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate at the earliest, in any case, not beyond 24 hours from the date of arrest excluding the journey time so that arrest of such person and his detention, if necessary, may be justified by a judicial order.

·         The 24 hours period prescribed u/s 57 Cr PC is the outermost limit beyond which a person cannot be detained in police custody. It does not empower a police officer to keep a person in police station a minute longer than is necessary for the purpose of investigation and it does not give him an absolute right to keep a person till 24 hours.

·         The police officer should effect arrest u/s 41(l)(b) Cr PC only when he has reasonable suspicion and credible information. He must satisfy himself about the existence of the material to effect arrest. There must be definite facts or averments as distinguished from vague surmises or personal feelings. The materials before him must be sufficient to cause a bona-fide belief.

·         To make the arrest, the Police officer cannot take shelter under another person's belief or judgment. He must affect arrest at his own risk and responsibility as the effect of illegal arrest could be commission of offence of wrongful confinement punishable u/s 342 IPC. Burden lies on the IO to satisfy the Court about his bona-fide. No arrest can be made because it is lawful for the police officer to do so. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter

·         Medical examination soon after arrest to avoid possibility of physical torture during custody should be conducted.

·         The IO must maintain a complete and comprehensive case diary indicating the investigation carried out by him.

·         The log book of the vehicle used for transportation must be maintained and signed. The IO must indicate whether the vehicle was official or a private one; name of its driver and how and by whom it was arranged. Only official vehicle should be used for transportation to the extent possible.

·         MHA/Central Govt/Commissioner of Police must frame suitable guidelines for police officers to render all suitable assistance. The failure to adhere to the rules/guidelines should render the police officer liable for departmental action as well as contempt of the Court

·         The public prosecutor should provide required assistance to the police officer visiting his State at the time of seeking transit remand.

·         The MHA/State Government should circulate the Rules/Guidelines/Notifications etc from time to time to the Police officers in the State to create awareness. Periodically training should be provided to the Police Officers to sensitize them.

·         Instructions/Guidelines of similar nature should exist in all the States/UTs for speedy, smooth and effective inter-State investigation.

·         The delinquent Police Officer can be directed to pay compensation under the public law and by way of strict liability.

Guidelines to ensure adults are not illegally and forcibly taken away against their free will

·         At the time of recovery of the prosecutrix, the police officer, if he is satisfied that she is adult, should ascertain from her at the spot, whether she was present there with her free will.

·         If the victim/prosecutrix is not willing to accompany the police officer or her relatives, the police officer must not exert force on the prosecutrix to take her away against her wishes. However, if the prosecutrix/victim of her own accord expresses willingness to accompany the police officer/relatives, her consent in writing should be obtained at the spot.

·         In case where the police officer finds the victim/prosecutrix to be a 'minor', soon after recovery, she should be produced before the local Child Welfare Committee for further decision regarding her custody. She must not be made to stay in the Police Station during night hours.

·         Statement of the prosecutrix u/s 164 Cr.P.C. must be recorded at the earliest.

Guidelines for when it is not feasible to inform the local police in advance

·         In case of urgency or other considerations in the interest of investigation, it is not found feasible to inform the police station encompassing the jurisdiction of the search, seizure, arrest or investigation before the event, this should be done soon after the search, seizure, arrest etc. has been conducted.

·         In all cases a diary entry should mandatorily be made in the police station of jurisdiction.