Informant Police Officer can investigate
Investigation conducted by the informant / police officer, who is the complainant, is not vitiated because of the sole reason that the informant is the investigator, says the Supreme court (SC) in Mukesh Singh v State ( Narcotic Branch of Delhi) .
The judgement in Mukesh Singh case overruled the SC judgement in Mohanlal v State of Punjab [ 2018 (4) KHC 387]. In Mohanlal case, the court held that if the investigation is conducted by Police Officer who himself is the complainant, trial is vitiated and therefore the accused is entitled to acquittal.
Accused need not be acquitted when IO investigates
The Mukesh Singh case states that such an investigation by an informant police officer would not suffer from the vice of unfairness or bias. Therefore, on the sole ground that informant is the investigator, the accused is not entitled to get acquittal. Such matter has to be decided on a case-to-case basis.
There is no reason to doubt the credibility of the informant and discard the entire case of the prosecution, solely on the ground that the informant (Police Officer) has investigated the case.
Either on receiving information or otherwise, obligation is cast upon the police officer in charge of the police station to take cognisance of information and to reduce the information into writing by himself and thereafter investigate the facts and circumstances of the case and to take measures for the discovery and arrest of the offender.
Legal provisions in CrPC
The paragraph 9 of the judgement in Mukesh Singh case describes the provisions in Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) that are relied on by the court, as follows:
“Section 154 Cr.P.C. provides that every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction.
Section 156 Cr.P.C. provides that any officer in charge of a police station may investigate any cognizable offence without the order of a Magistrate. It further provides that no proceeding of a police officer in any such case shall at any stage be called in question on the ground that the case was one which such officer was not empowered under this section to investigate. Therefore, as such, a duty is cast on an officer in charge of a police station to reduce the information in writing relating to commission of a cognizable offence and thereafter to investigate the same.
Section 157 Cr.P.C. specifically provides that if, from information received or otherwise, an officer in charge of a police station has reason to suspect the commission of an offence which he is empowered under Section 156 to investigate, he shall forthwith send a report of the same to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of such offence upon a police report and shall proceed in person to the spot to investigate the facts and circumstances of the case and, if necessary, to take measures for the discovery and arrest of the offender”.
Merely because the informant is the investigator, the investigation would not suffer the vice of unfairness or bias. On the sole ground that informant is the investigator, the accused is not entitled to acquittal, as well. The question of bias will have to be decided based on the facts of each case. The prosecution should demonstrate that the investigation was fair and with veracity.
References
