Now is the time for a quick few words on the catch of this revised edition.
Installation of CCTV in Police Stations and Video Recording of crime-scenes
By virtue of three judges bench decision of the Supreme Court a system is devised as that of ‘deputing a watchdog’ on the door of each Police Station, by installation of CCTV cameras at all Police Stations, videography of crime scenes etc., in an attempt to answer umpteen numbers of question that are asked by means of cross-examination of police witnesses during the court of trial. However, horse-rope has been left yet in the hands of the purported erring Investigating Officer, inasmuch as the control of the said CCTV Footage, Videography of the crime-scene shall ultimately remain with the Investigating Officer, directly or indirectly!
In this view of the matter, therefore, preempting the purported sinister manipulations by the Investigating Officer by devising a system of recording of investigations in video form, as suggested by the Supreme Court, is susceptible to further manipulations by the very same Officer who shall ultimately be responsible for such recording and preservation of such recording thereafter! Better model was, therefore, required to be articulated after proper public debate and understanding inasmuch as single person sitting on the bench would not be able to have such facilities as the Parliamentarian do have.
FIR: Uploading on internet, necessary
Various directions once over again have been given by division bench comprising of two judges of the Supreme Court thereby making the matter beyond cavil that FIR, once registered, must be uploaded on internet within 24 hours, unless the matter pertains to the security of State or sexual offences, privacy or insurgency etc. Similarly, directions were also given for supplying the copy of FIR to the complainant and also the accused or his perokar.
In the considered opinion of the present authors, the very fact that in this era of internet when even for obtaining life saving corona vaccine one needs registration on internet and for interstate commutation one needs exhibition of copy of such certificate of being vaccinated. Supreme Court had to once again reiterate the said principle of uploading and supplying of copy of FIR to the interested parties. This clearly reveals that in the present scenario, the administration must be failing in its duly, and for this reason alone, this kind of dictum is being passed by the Supreme Court! Nothing more needs to be said in this regard, indeed.
Appropriate and more meaningful would have been such directions, if it was further said that line for each days’ delay shall be imposed recoverable from the erring officer by pre-fixing responsibility. [Emphasis).
Draft Criminal Rules of Practice, 2021
Three judges bench of the Supreme Court once again took the task on itself while sitting with few advocates on both sides to articulate the Draft Criminal Rules of Practice, 2021 in a text of 2-3 pages alone. It is not understandable as to whether the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1073 has been substituted by the Supreme Court or that a summary has been made thereof! Is it to supplement or supplant the long existing procedure standing incorporated in the form of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
There has to be a proper procedure for drafting of such rules thereby passing through the scrutiny of specialized Committees or Commissions, public or parliamentary debates, voting, recording of descent by opposition, if any, and so on, preceded by a manifesto of a political party which is foundation of election of a government. We have devised a system of separation of powers in our Constitution. Power to legislate has been conferred on to the legislature alone. Usurping of power of one organ by another would tantamount to betrayal of basic structure of the Constitution. The function of judicial courts is only to decide dispute between the parties before it, and not beyond. Thereafter, the ratio devised therefrom is used for decision of other cases. However, laying down of draft petitions, affidavits of income, criminal rules of practice, etc. is altogether is foreign to the legal system that we have adopted.
These days umpteen numbers of judgments are being pronounced not only by the Supreme Court but various High Courts as well, such that credit is sought by a few persons alone, sitting on the bench or otherwise for formulating such guidelines without, however, making any attempt for incorporating the same in the Supreme Court Rules or High Court Rules of the relevant State, if it was so necessary. This practice, if made for publicity of a few alone, is to be deprecated [Emphasis].
Monitoring of investigation by the Magistrate
It has now been clarified by (he Supreme Court the obvious law that when an order is passed under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Magistrate can also monitor investigation, though he cannot himself investigate and parties may also produce any evidence they wish to adduce before the court.1 However, we fail to understand as to why power of the Magistrate to monitor investigation has been acknowledge to be available also in cases where the police in its bid registered FIR and carrying investigation. Monitoring of investigation by judicial courts, in the considered opinion of the present authors, is inherent in our judicial system, which cannot be given a go-bye. Of course, day-to-day interference in such cases by courts in the matters of police investigation may not be in good taste and the courts should act with self-restraint in such matters!
- Publisher: Vinod Publications
- Author : S.P. Tyagi
- Edition : 4th Edition 2022
- ISBN-13 : 9788194271109
- ISBN-10 : 9788194271109
- Language : English
- No. Of Volumes : 4