Supreme Court clarifies essential elements of Police Report under Section 173 of CrPC in Dablu Kujur vs. State of Jharkhand (2024) INSC 197 (12 March 2024)

LEGAL ISSUE: What are the mandatory requirements for a police report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973?

CASE TYPE: Criminal Law

Case Name: Dablu Kujur vs. The State of Jharkhand

[Judgment Date]: 12 March 2024

Introduction

Date of the Judgment: 12 March 2024

Citation: 2024 INSC 197

Judges: Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal

What details must a police report contain for a court to take cognizance of a criminal offense? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this crucial question in a case concerning a bail application. The Court, while denying bail, took the opportunity to clarify the mandatory requirements for a police report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). This judgment emphasizes the importance of a thorough and legally compliant police report for the proper administration of criminal justice. The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal.

Case Background

The appellant, Dablu Kujur, was accused of offenses under Sections 302 (murder), 120-B (criminal conspiracy), and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 25(1-B) A/26/27/35 of the Arms Act. He had filed a bail application before the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, which was dismissed on 17.01.2023. The appellant then approached the Supreme Court seeking bail. During the proceedings, it was brought to the Court’s attention that the trial was nearing completion, with almost all prosecution witnesses examined, except one.

The Supreme Court, on 17.07.2023, had previously directed the Director General of Police (DGP) of Jharkhand to examine whether the chargesheet filed in this case was in accordance with law, noting that it appeared to lack necessary details. The Court also sought reports from the DGPs of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh regarding the filing of similar chargesheets without adequate particulars.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The appellant had initially approached the High Court of Jharkhand seeking bail, which was rejected. Subsequently, the appellant filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, while hearing the matter, noted that the trial was at its final stage. The Court also observed that the chargesheet filed in the case lacked necessary details and directed the Director General of Police (DGP) of Jharkhand to examine the matter. The Court also sought reports from the DGPs of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh regarding the filing of similar chargesheets without adequate particulars.

Legal Framework

The judgment extensively discusses the legal framework surrounding police reports, particularly under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).

Section 2(r) of the CrPC defines a “Police Report” as a report forwarded by a police officer to a Magistrate under Section 173(2) of the CrPC.

Section 173 of the CrPC outlines the procedure for submitting a police report after the completion of an investigation. It states:

“173. Report of police officer on completion of investigation. —
(1) Every investigation under this Chapter shall be completed without unnecessary delay.
[(1A) The investigation in relation to [an offence under sections 376,376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB or 376E] from the date on which the information was recorded by the officer in charge of the police station.]
(2) (i) As soon as it is completed, the officer in charge of the police station shall forward to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence on a police report, a report in the form prescribed by the State Government, stating —
(a) the names of the parties;
(b) the nature of the information;
(c) the names of the persons who appear to be acquainted with the circumstances of the case;
(d) whether any offence appears to have been committed and, if so, by whom;
(e) whether the accused has been arrested;
(f) whether he has been released on his bond and, if so, whether with or without sureties;
(g) whether he has been forwarded in custody under section 170.
(h) whether the report of medical examination of the woman has been attached where investigation relates to an offence under 2 [sections 376,376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB] or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)].]
(ii) The officer shall also communicate, in such manner as may be prescribed by the State Government, the action taken by him, to the person, if any, by whom the information relating to the commission of the offence was first given.
(3) Where a superior officer of police has been appointed under section 158, the report shall, in any case in which the State Government by general or special order so directs, be submitted through that officer, and he may, pending the orders of the Magistrate, direct the officer in charge of the police station to make further investigation.
(4) Whenever it appears from a report forwarded under this section that the accused has been released on his bond, the Magistrate shall make such order for the discharge of such bond or otherwise as he thinks fit.
(5) When such report is in respect of a case to which section 170 applies, the police officer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the report —
(a) all documents or relevant extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation;
(b) the statements recorded under section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses.
(6) If the police officer is of opinion that any part of any such statement is not relevant to the subject -matter of the proceedings or that its disclosure to the accused is not essential in the interests of justice and is inexpedient in the public interest, he shall indicate that part of the statement and append a note requesting the Magistrate to exclude that part from the copies to be granted to the accused and stating his reasons for making such request.
(7) Where the police officer investigating the case finds it convenient so to do, he may furnish to the accused copies of all or any of the documents referred to in sub -section (5).
(8) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to preclude further investigation in respect of an offence after a report under sub -section (2) has been forwarded to the Magistrate and, where upon such investigation, the officer in charge of the police station obtains further evidence, oral or documentary, he shall forward to the Magistrate a further report or reports regarding such evidence in the form prescribed; and the provisions of sub -sections (2) to (6) shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to such report or reports as they apply in relation to a report forwarded under sub -section (2)”

The court also referred to Section 157 of the CrPC, which deals with the procedure for investigation, and Section 169 of the CrPC, which deals with the release of the accused when there is no sufficient evidence. Section 170 of the CrPC pertains to cases to be sent to the Magistrate when evidence is sufficient. Section 172 pertains to the diary of proceedings in investigation.

Arguments

The primary arguments in this case revolved around the compliance of the police report with the requirements of Section 173(2) of the CrPC. The Supreme Court had previously noted that the chargesheet filed in this case was lacking in details and particulars. The State of Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar filed affidavits with regard to the steps taken/being taken by them for submitting the Chargesheets/ Police Reports in accordance with law. The court emphasized the importance of complying with Section 173(2) of the CrPC.

The court noted that the police report under Section 173(2) is a crucial document for the prosecution, the defense, and the court. It is the basis for the court to take cognizance of an offense and proceed with the trial. The court observed that non-compliance with the requirements of Section 173(2) can lead to various legal issues.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not frame specific issues in this judgment. However, the core issue was the interpretation and compliance of Section 173(2) of the CrPC. The court also considered the importance of a complete and legally sound police report.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

The Supreme Court addressed the issue by providing detailed guidelines on what constitutes a complete police report under Section 173(2) of the CrPC. The Court emphasized that the police report must contain all the details specified in the provision. The Court also highlighted the significance of the police report as the basis for the court to take cognizance of an offense.

Authorities

The Supreme Court considered the following authorities:

The Court also considered the following legal provisions:

• Section 2(r) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): Defines “Police Report”.
• Section 157 of the CrPC: Outlines the procedure for investigation.
• Section 169 of the CrPC: Deals with the release of the accused when there is no sufficient evidence.
• Section 170 of the CrPC: Pertains to cases to be sent to the Magistrate when evidence is sufficient.
• Section 172 of the CrPC: Pertains to the diary of proceedings in investigation.
• Section 173 of the CrPC: Outlines the procedure for submitting a police report after the completion of an investigation.

Judgment

The Supreme Court, after considering the legal provisions and previous judgments, directed that the police report on completion of investigation must contain the following:

(i) A report in the form prescribed by the State Government stating:

• (a) the names of the parties;
• (b) the nature of the information;
• (c) the names of the persons who appear to be acquainted with the circumstances of the case;
• (d) whether any offence appears to have been committed and, if so, by whom;
• (e) whether the accused has been arrested;
• (f) whether he has been released on his bond and, if so, whether with or without sureties;
• (g) whether he has been forwarded in custody under section 170;
• (h) Whether the report of medical examination of the woman has been attached where investigation relates to an offence under [sections 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB] or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).

(ii) If upon the completion of investigation, there is no sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion to justify the forwarding of the accused to a Magistrate, the Police officer in charge shall clearly state in the Report about the compliance of Section 169 Cr.PC.

(iii) When the report in respect of a case to which Section 170 applies, the police officer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the report, all the documents or relevant extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation; and the statements recorded under Section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses.

(iv) In case of further investigation, the Police officer in charge shall forward to the Magistrate a further report or reports regarding such evidence in the form prescribed and shall also comply with the details mentioned in the above sub para (i) to (iii).

The Court further directed that the officer in charge of the police stations in every State shall strictly comply with the afore-stated directions, and the non-compliance thereof shall be strictly viewed by the concerned courts in which the Police Reports are submitted.

“The Police Report submitted by the police under Section 173(2) being very important piece of document from the view point of the prosecution, the defence and the court, we deem it necessary to elaborately deal with the various aspects involved in the said provision.”

“It is an opinion or intimation of the investigating officer to the concerned court that on the material collected during the course of investigation, an offence appears to have been committed by the particular person or persons, or that no offence appears to have been committed.”

“The above referred discussion has been necessitated for highlighting the significance of the compliance of requirements of the provisions contained in Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C.”

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily driven by the need to ensure that police reports, which form the basis for judicial proceedings, are comprehensive and legally compliant. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to the requirements of Section 173(2) of the CrPC to maintain the integrity of the criminal justice system. The court’s reasoning was also influenced by the fact that the trial was at its fag end, and the court did not want to interfere with the trial process.

The court’s reasoning was primarily based on legal considerations, focusing on the interpretation and application of Section 173(2) of the CrPC. The factual aspects of the case, such as the stage of the trial, played a secondary role in the court’s decision.

Key Takeaways

• Police reports under Section 173(2) of the CrPC must strictly adhere to the prescribed format and include all necessary details.
• Non-compliance with the requirements of Section 173(2) can lead to legal issues and may affect the validity of the proceedings.
• Investigating officers must ensure that all mandatory details are included in the police report.
• The judgment emphasizes the importance of a thorough and legally compliant police report for the proper administration of criminal justice.

Directions

The Supreme Court directed that:

• The officer in charge of the police stations in every State shall strictly comply with the directions given in the judgment regarding the contents of the Police Report.
• Non-compliance with these directions shall be strictly viewed by the concerned courts in which the Police Reports are submitted.
• A copy of the order be sent to all the Chief Secretaries of the States/UTs as also to Registrar Generals of the High Courts for perusal and compliance.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of this case is that a police report under Section 173(2) of the CrPC must contain all the mandatory details as specified in the provision. This judgment clarifies the legal position regarding the essential requirements of a police report and provides specific directions for the police officers to follow. This judgment does not change the previous position of law but rather reinforces it by providing specific directions.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court, in this case, did not grant bail to the appellant but used the opportunity to clarify the requirements of a police report under Section 173(2) of the CrPC. The Court emphasized that a police report must be comprehensive, detailed, and compliant with the legal provisions to ensure the proper administration of criminal justice. The judgment provides clear guidelines for police officers and emphasizes the importance of strict adherence to the law.