Q.Describe the organization of police, prosecutor, defense counsel and prison authorities and their functions, duties, and powers. Police The ordinary criminal courts derive their existence from CrPC. However, CrPC does not say anything about the constitution of Police. It assumes the existence of police and devolves various powers and responsibilities on to it. Functions - As per The Police Act, 1861, the police force is an instrument for the prevention and detection of crime. Organization - Every state establishes its own police force which is formally enrolled. The force consists of such number of officers and men and is constituted in such manner as the state govt. may decide from time to time. The overall administration of police in the entire state is done by Director General of Police. The administration of police in a district is done by District Superintendent of Police under the general control and direction of District Magistrate who is usually the Collector of the district. Every police officer appointed to the police force, other than Inspector General of Police and District Superintendent of Police, receives a certificate in prescribed form by virtue of which he is vested with the powers, functions and privileges of a police officer. The Police Act, 1888 also empowers the Central Govt to create special police districts and to extend the jurisdiction of police of any state to that district. The Police Act 1949, creates a police force for Union Territories. Powers - 1. The Cr P C confers specific powers on the members of police force who are enrolled as police officers. These powers include power to make an arrest, search, and investigate. Wider powers have been given to police officers in charge of a police station. As per Section 2(s), police station means any post or place that is generally or specially designated by the state govt as a police station. Further, as per Section 2(o) officer in charge of a police station includes the officer who is present at the police station and is next in rank to the police officer in charge, if he is on leave or is absent. This only increases the importance of the police officer in charge of a police station. 2. Section 36 of CrPC specifies that officers of police who are superior in rank to police officer in charge of a police station can exercise all the powers of that police officer. In the case of State of Bihar vs J A C Saldanha SCC 1980, SC held that if the Inspector General (Vigilance) is an officer superior to the officer in charge of the police station he can exercise the powers of that officer through out the territory to which the superior officer has been appointed, which, in this case is the entire territory of Bihar. Prosecutor A crime is a wrong not only against an individual but is also against the society. It is because of this reason that the state, which represents the collective of people, participates in the criminal trial of an accused, specially if the crime is of cognizable nature. Public Prosecutor or Assistant Public Prosecutor is the state counsel for such trials. As per section 2(u), Public Prosecutor means any person appointed under Section 24 and includes any person acting under the directions of the public prosecutor. Section 24 of CrPC specifies the rules for appointment of Public Prosecutor. A person shall be eligible to be appointed in High Court as Public Prosecutor if he has been in practice as an advocate for not less than seven years. The appointment can be made only after consultation with the High Court. Further, the central govt. can appoint a Public Prosecutor for conducting in a high court any prosecution, appeal, or other proceeding on behalf of the Central Govt. Assistant Public Prosecutor are appointed under Section 25. It authorizes the State Govt. to appoint one or more APPs for every district for conducting any case in Court of Magistrates. No police officer is allowed to be appointed as APP. Duties - Duty of a public prosecutor mainly consists in conducting the prosecution on behalf of the state. His goal is not merely to produce a conviction but the help the court arrive at a just decision. He also appears as the state counsel in criminal appeals. a Public Prosecutor or Assistant Public Prosecutor has the authority to appear and plead before any court in any case entrusted to him. As per Section 321. he can withdraw from the prosecution against any person with the consent of the court. the prosecution is conducted by the APP and in cases initiated on a private complaint the prosecution is either conducted by the complainant himself or by his duly authorized counsel. a qualified . As per Section 301. Powers - 1. in respect of cases initiated on police reports. Defense Counsel: As per Section 303. 2. any person accused of an offence before a Criminal Court has a right to be defended by a pleader of his choice. According to the pattern set by CrPC. Public Prosecutors conduct the proceedings in Session Courts and the High Courts and Assistant Public Prosecutors are appointed for conducting prosecution in Magistrates' Courts. revisions. Since. Such pleaders are not in regular employment of the state and a paid remuneration by the accused person. and such other matters in the Session Courts and High Court. It is important to note that he does not appear on behalf of the accused. As per prevailing practice. Bar Association. 1900.legal practitioner on behalf of the accused is essential for ensuring a fair trial. . the court shall assign a pleader for him at state's expense. 1987 also provides free legal aid for the needy. At present there are several schemes through which an indigent accused can get free legal aid such as Legal Aid Scheme of State. The code empowers magistrates and judges under certain circumstances to order detention of under trial prisoners in jail during the pendency of proceedings. the code does not make specific provisions for creation and administration of prison authorities. and Supreme Court Senior Advocates Fee Legal Aid Society. These matters are dealt with in separate acts such as The Prisons Act 1894. Section 304 provides that if the accused does not have means to hire a pleader. The Prisoners Act. Prison Authorities: CrPC presumes the existence of Prisons and Prison authorities. However. and the Probation of Offenders Act 1958. Legal Aid and Service Board. The Legal Services Authorities Act. The code also empowers the courts to impose sentences of imprisonment on convicted persons and to send them to prison authorities. Right to legal aid . while Section 46 describes how an arrest is a made. 167. Sec 50.Art 22(2) Sec 57. Cr P C contemplates two types of arrests . after arrest. Section 41 to 44 contain provisions that govern the arrest of a person by police and private citizens.Q. Arrest is an important tool for bringing an accused before the court as well as to prevent a crime or prevent a person suspected of doing crime from running away from the law. [Right to know the grounds of arrest Art 22(1). Right to be produced before nearest magistrate within 24 hrs .Arrest in case of Warrant is discussed in another question. a person's liberty is in control of the arrester. Thus.Art 22(2) Sec 56.Art 21. Right not to be detained in custody beyond 24 hrs .an arrest that is made for the execution of a warrant issued by a magistrate and an arrest that is made without any warrant but in accordance with some legal provision that permits arrest. Sec 303. (Note .Art 22(1). 57. Right to consult and to be defended by legal practitioner of his choice . Right to be examined by medical practitioner] Arrest means apprehension of a person by legal authority so as to cause deprivation of his liberty. Right to bail Sec 50(2). 50(A). Sec 304. What do you understand by Arrest? How is an arrest made? When can the police arrest a person without an order from a magistrate and/or without a warrant? Explain the rights of an arrested person.) . of his having been so concerned. or (d) in whose possession anything is found which may reasonably be suspected to be stolen property and who may reasonably be suspected of having committed an offence with reference to such thing. or against whom a reasonable complaint has been made. or (b) who has in his possession without lawful excuse. or (e) who obstructs a police officer while in the execution of . a magistrate or even private citizen without a warrant. or credible information has been received. These are described in Section 41. the burden of proving which excuse shall lie on such person. arrest any person – (a) who has been concerned in any cognizable offence. or a reasonable suspicion exists. 42. any implement of house-breaking. When police may arrest without warrant (CIPSODOBO) (1) Any police officer may without an order from a Magistrate and without a warrant. or (c) who has been proclaimed as an offender either under this Code or by order of the State Government. 43.Section 41.Arrest without warrant There are situations when a person may be arrested by a police officer. and 44 as follows Arrest by Police . or attempts to escape. any act committed at any place out of India which. or (I) for whose arrest any requisition. or (h) who. whether written or oral. arrest or cause to be arrested any person. or (f) who is reasonably suspected of being a deserter from any of the Armed Forces of the Union. of his having been concerned in. . liable to be apprehended or detained in custody in India. or a reasonable suspicion exists. if committed in India. or against whom a reasonable complaint has been made. or (g) who has been concerned in. and for which he is. in like manner. being a released convict. or otherwise. from lawful custody. or who has escaped. or credible information has been received. (2) Any officer in charge of a police station may. has been received from another police officer. would have been punishable as an offence. belonging to one or more of the categories of persons specified in section 109 or section 110. commits a breach of any rule made under sub-section (5) of section 356.his duty. under any law relating to extradition. provided that the requisition specifies the person to be arrested and the offence or other cause for which the arrest is to be made and it appears therefrom that the person might lawfully be arrested without a warrant by the officer who issued the requisition. when any person who. it was held that the "reasonable suspicion" and "creditable information" must relate to definite averments which must be considered by the Police Officer himself before he arrests the person. has committed or has been accused of committing a non-cognizable offence refuses. as per sub clause (2). in State vs Bhera. Section 42 allows a police officer to arrest a person for a noncognizable offence. CrLJ. Further. as per sub clause (3). 1994. on demand of such officer. with or without sureties. As per Section 42(1). it was held that no arrest can be made merely because it is lawful to do so. should the true name and residence of such person not be ascertained within twenty-four . he may be arrested by such officer in order that his name or residence may be ascertained. He may be required to execute a bond. Further. if such person is not resident in India. to appear before a Magistrate if necessary. the bond shall be secured by a surety or sureties resident in India. There must be a justifiable reason to arrest. the person must be released when the true name and residence of such person have been ascertained. 1997. in the presence of a police officer.In the case of Joginder Kumar vs State of UP. Provided that. However. if he refuses to give his name and residence. to give his name and residence or gives a name or residence which such officer has reason to believe to be false. CrLJ. he may be rightly arrested by any citizen and taken to the nearest police station. without unnecessary delay. or. to furnish sufficient sureties. if so required. Thus.hours from the time of arrest or should he fail to execute the bond. take such person or cause him to be taken in custody to the nearest police station. This is important because police cannot be present at every nook and corner and it is up to private citizens to protect the society from disruptive elements or criminals. Arrest by Private person Even private persons are empowered to arrest a person for protection of peace in certain situations. Procedure on arrest by private person – . it is important to note that this power can be exercised only when the person making an arrest is under a bona fide impression that a non-bailable and cognizable office is being committed in his presence. if a person is drunk and is committing assault on others. or. in the absence of a police officer. shall make over or cause to be made over any person so arrested to a police officer. However. he shall forthwith be forwarded to the nearest Magistrate having jurisdiction. any private person may arrest or cause to be arrested any person who in his presence commits a non-bailable and cognizable offence. One does not have a right to arrest on mere suspicion or on mere opinion that an offence has been committed. As per section 43(1). and. or any proclaimed offender. a police officer shall rearrest him. If he keeps the person in his own custody. if there is reason to believe that he has committed a non-cognizable offence. If there is reason to believe that such person comes under the provisions of section 41. He must make an entry of the fact as to who has been informed of the arrest of such person in a book to be kept in the police station in such form as may be prescribed in this behalf by the State Government. he shall be at once released. Further. he shall be dealt with under the provisions of section 42. or gives a name or residence which such officer has reason to believe to be false. the private person must take the arrested person to the police officer or police station without any reasonable delay. and he refuses on the demand of a police officer to give his name and residence. Further. as per section 43(3). the police officer shall inform the arrested person of his rights under subsection as soon as he is brought to the police station.As mentioned above. As per section 43(2). to satisfy himself that the . which makes it obligatory for the police officer or any other person making an arrest to give the information regarding such arrest and place where the arrested person is being held to any of his friends. he will be guilty of wrongful confinement as given in Section 342 of IPC. relatives or such other persons as may be disclosed or nominated by the arrested person for the purpose of giving such information. but if there is no sufficient reason to believe that he has committed any offence. A new provision has been incorporated as Section 50A. It is the duty of the Magistrate before whom such arrested person is produced. the arrester shall actually touch or confine the body of the person to be arrested. of any person for whose arrest he is competent at the time and in the circumstances to issue a warrant. within his local jurisdiction. when any offence is committed in the presence of a Magistrate. otherwise his detention will be illegal. whether Executive or Judicial. Important thing to note here is that magistrates have wider power than private citizen.requirements of this section has been complied with in respect of such arrested person. he may himself arrest or order any person to arrest the offender. A magistrate can arrest on the ground of any offence and not only on cognizable offence. the arrested person must be produced before another magistrate within 24 hours. Arrest how made – Section 46 describes the way in which an arrest is actually made. unless the person being arrested consents to the submission to custody by words or actions. As held in the case of Swami Hariharanand Saraswati vs Jailer I/C Dist. AIR 1954. subject to the provisions herein contained as to bail. Varanasi. . Arrest by Magistrate As per Section 44(1). within his local jurisdiction. may at any time arrest or direct the arrest. in his presence. and may thereupon. (2) Any Magistrate. whether Executive or Judicial. commit the offender to custody. Further. As per Section 46(1). CrLJ. he would be considered to have submitted to the custody of the police officer. as held in the case of Bharosa Ramdayal vs Emperor AIR 1941. However.Since arrest is a restraint on the liberty of the person. if the accused proceeds towards the police station as directed by the police officer. and it can also be complete by spoken words if the person submits to custody. while arresting that person. For example. it was held that arrest need not be by handcuffing the person. The submission to custody may be by express words or by action. Mere oral declaration of arrest by the arrester without getting submission to custody or physical touching to confine the body will not amount to arrest. he has submitted to the custody. In case of Birendra Kumar Rai vs Union of India. physical contact is not required. Similarly. if the person tries to runaway. he can use physical force to immobilize the accused. such police officer or other person may use all means necessary to effect the arrest. an arrested person must not be subjected to more restraint than is necessary to prevent him from escaping. 1992. Section 46(2) If such person forcibly resists the endeavor to arrest him. there is no right to cause the death of the person who is not accused of an offence punishable with death or with imprisonment for life. Further. the police officer can take actions to prevent his escape and in doing so. In such cases. as per Section 49. it is necessary for the person being arrested to either submit to custody or the arrester must touch and confine his body. as per Section 46(3). . or attempts to evade the arrest. if a person makes a statement to the police accusing himself of committing an offence. Thus. Further. to meet the needs of "fair trial". can be seen as recognition of the rights of a person being arrested. it was held that keeping a person in the police station or confining the movement of the person in the precincts of the police station amounts to arrest of the person. indirectly. To ensure that this power is not used arbitrarily. once arrested. in which case the arrest can be done by a woman police officer after making a written report and obtaining a prior permission from the concerned Judicial Magistrate of First class. Rights of an Arrested person (GBMLLIM) Cr P C gives wide powers to the police for arresting a person. 1992. which. several restraints have been put on it. several provisions are given in CrPC. described as follows – These rights can be . Thus. In Kultej Singh vs Circle Inspector of Police.Due to concerns of violation of the rights of women. that give specific rights to an arrested person. a new provision was inserted in Section 46(4) that forbids the arrest of women after sunset and before sunrise. Such powers without appropriate safeguards for the arrested person will be harmful for the society. a person is already at a disadvantage because of his lack of freedom and so he cannot take appropriate steps to defend himself. except in exceptional circumstances. the subordinate officer must notify the person to be arrested of the substance of the written order given by the senior officer. every police officer or other person arresting any person without warrant shall forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest. if the substance of the warrant is not notified. ILR 26 Cal 748. All HC held that right to be notified of grounds of arrest is a precious right of the arrested person.1. In this case. the police officer or any person making arrest under warrat must notify the substance of the warrant to the person being arrested and if required. The same provision exists in case of an arrest made under a warrant in Section 75. of . the arrest would be unlawful. Right to know the grounds of arrest . "No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed. when a subordinate officer is deputed by a senior police officer to arrest a person under Section 55. As held in Satish Chandra Rai vs Jodu Nandan Singh. This right is also a fundamental right given by the Constitution in Art 22(1). In Udaybhan Shuki vs State of UP 1999 CrLJ. or make appropriate arrangements for his defence. which says. This allows him to move the proper court for bail.Section 50(1) According this provision. Similarly. make a writ petition for habeas corpus. which clearly specifes the offence for which he is being arrested. as soon as may be. must show the warrant. Section 50(2) .". not every person knows about Cr P C and so they cannot know that they can get bail immediately. In Harikishan vs State of Maharashtra AIR 1962. and to be defended by. At the same . Section 50(2).the right to be told of the grounds of arrest and the right to consult a legal practioner of his choice. Right to be informed of the provision for bail . The second right of consulting a legal practitioner of his choice actually depends on the first right of being told about the grounds of arrest.Some offences that are not very serious do not require the offender to be kept in custody. For such offences. SC held that the grounds of arrest must be communicated to the person in the language that he understands otherwise it would not amount to sufficient compliance of the constitutional requirement. 3. If the person doesn't know why he is being arrested. provides that where a police officer arrests any person other than a person accused of a non-bailable offence without warrant. a legal practitioner of his choice. Right to be taken to magistrate without delay . he shall inform the person arrested that he is entitled to be released on bail and that he may arrange for sureties on his behalf.the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to consult. 2. It embodies two distinc rights . However. he cannot consult a legal practioner meaningfully.Holding a person in custody without first proving that the person is guilty is a violation of human rights and is completely unfair. Cr P C allows the offender to ask for bail as a matter of right. Thus. it cannot be the agency that determines whether person must be kept confined further. "No police officer shall detain in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable." Section 57 of CrPC also contains a similar provision for a person arrested without a warrant. It says. exceed twenty four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate's court.time. "The police officer or other person executing a warrant of arrest shall (subject to the provisions of section 71 as to security) without unnecessary delay bring the ." Section 76 contains a similar provision for a person arrested under a warrant. This can only be decided by a competent judicial authority. It says. This is exactly what is embodied in Art 22(2) that gives a fundamental right to the arrested person that he must be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours of arrest. and such period shall not. "Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate. It says. These two are contradictory requirements and a balance must be found between them. Since police has arrested the person. in the absence of a special order of a Magistrate under Section 167. holding a person in custody is necessary for the police to carry on their investigation of a crime. person arrested before the court before which he is required by law to produce such person." Thus. However. AIR 1961. Further. It prevents arrest merely for the purpose of extracting confessions. they should come heavily upon the police. it can be see that it is a very important right that is meant to prevent abuse of police power and to prevent the use of a police station as a prison. Provided that such delay shall not. he shall be held guilty of wrongful detention. this article seems to be applicable on arrests with or without warrants. in Sharifbai vs Abdul Razak. The arrested person gets to be heard by a judicial authority that is independent of the police. SC held that if a police officer fails to produce an arrested person before a magistrate within 24 hours. Constitutional Perspective on Art 22(2) . In Khatri (II) vs State of Bihar 1981 SCC. in State of Punjab vs Ajiab Singh AIR 1953. It is necessary that the magistrates should try to enforce this requirement and when they find it disobeyed. in any case. SC has strongly urged upon the State and its police to ensure that this constitutional and legal requirement of bringing an arrested person before a judicial magistrate within 24 hours be scrupulously met. . This is a healthy provision that allows magistrates to keep a check on the police investigation.On the face of it. exceed twenty-four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate's court. It is up to the arrested person to contact and appoint a such a legal practitioner. Section 304 provides that where. The same right is also provide by CrPC under Section 303. a legal practitioner of his choice. the proviso to Section 76 unmistakably provides that a person arrested under a warrant must be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours. The State's responsibility is only to ensure that he is not prevented from doing so. In any case. Right to consult Legal Practitioner - Art 22 (1) ." 5. It says that no person who is arrested shall be denied the right to consult. Second part of Article 22(1) gives this fundamental right to an arrested person. Right to free legal aid .Art 21 and Section 304 . may of right be defended by a pleader of his choice.For conducting a fair trial it is absolutely necessary that the accused person is able to consult with a legal practitioner whom he trusts.SC observed that it applies only to cases of arrests without warrant because in case of an arrest with warrant. which says. So further safeguard is not required. 4. However. the judicial mind has already been applied while issuing the warrant. "Any person accused of offence before a Criminal Court or against whom proceedings are instituted under this Code. this does not mean that the State must provide a legal practitioner of the person's choice. This casts a cloud on the fairness of the trial. and to be defended by. This decision has been widely criticized.A person who does not have the means to hire a legal practitioner is unable to defend himself appropriately. Therefore. in a trial . Supreme Court has also held that access to a legal practitioner is implicit in Article 21. in Joginder Kumar vs State of UP 1994. relative. the Supreme Court. or any other person of the accused person's choice. about his arrest. formulated the rules that make it mandatory on the police officer to inform one friend. In Khatri (II) vs State of Bihar 1981 SCC. which gives fundamental right to life and liberty. 6. The state is under constitutional mandate to provide free legal aid to an indigent accused person and this constitutional obligation arises not only when the trial is commenced but also when the person is first produced before a magistrate and also when he is remanded from time to time. The consultation with the lawyer may be within the presence of a police officer but not within the police officer's hearing. SC has held that non-compliance of this requirement or failure to inform the accused of this right would vitiate the trial entailing setting aside of the conviction and sentence. Right to be informed about the right to inform of his arrest to his relative or friend - In order to ensure a fair trial and to improve people-police relationship. The right of an accused person to consult his lawyer begins from the moment of his arrest. SC also held that it is the duty on all courts and magistrates to inform the indegent person about his right to get free legal aid. In Suk Das vs Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh 1986. the Court shall assign a pleader for his defense at the expense of the State. the accused is not represented by a pleader. SCC.before the Court of Session. and where appears to the Court that the accused has not sufficient means to engage a pleader. These rules were . While Section 53 allows a police officer to get the accused examined by a registered medical practitioner.later incorporated in CrPC under section 50 A in 2005. He must also tell the place where the arrested person has been kept. Section 50 A (2) provides that the police officer must inform the arrested person of this right. This is a very important step in ensuring justice with the arrested person because this allows the arrested person and his well wishers to take appropriate legal steps to secure his release. or any other person of the arrested person's choice. "When a person who is arrested. However. as per Section 50 A (3) he must note down the name and address of the person who was informed about the arrest. if requested by the arrested . the police officer must inform a relative or a friend. alleges. about his arrest. Section 54 (1) says thus. Further. Right to be examined by a medical practitioner . all this will amount to nothing if the arrested person does not even know about this very critical right. To make sure that there is no violation of this right. Section 50 A (1) provides that once the arrested person is brought to the police station. 7. Thus. at the time when he is produced before a Magistrate or at any time during. the period of his detention in custody that the examination of his body will afford evidence which will disprove the commission by him of any offence or which Magistrate shall. section 50 A (4) makes it a duty of the magistrate to verify that the provisions of this section were complied with. whether on a charge or otherwise. Section 54(1) gives the accused a right to get himself examined by a registered medical practitioner. However. it is not clear in the section whether the medical person must be of the choice of the accused or shall be appointed by the magistrate. In Sheela Barse vs State of Maharashtra 1983 SCC. SC held that the arrested accused person must be informed by the magistrate about his right to be medically examined in terms of Section 54(1). Non compliance to this important provision prompted Delhi High court to issue directions that make it obligatory for the magistrates to ask the arrested person as to whether he has any complaint of torture or maltreatment in police custody. Section 54(1) is meant for the accused to prove his innocence. While Section 53 is meant to aid the police in investigation. This right can also be used by the accused to prove that he was subjected to physical injury. Just because any provision relating to arrest was not complied with does not affect whether the accused is guilty or not. Consequences of non-compliance with the provisions relating to arrest - In general.person so to do direct the examination of' the body of such person by a registered medical practitioner unless the Magistrate considers that the request is made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of Justice". However. non-compliance does not void a trial. the violation will be material in case the accused is prosecuted on the charge of . The section is also silent on who will bear the expense of the examination. Some offences largely affect only the victim and no considerable harm is considered to be done to the society. everybody has a right to defend himself against unlawful arrest and a person can exercise this right under Section 96 to 106 of IPC and he will not be liable for any injury caused due to it. It is important to note that the provisions regarding arrest cannot be by-passed by alleging that there was no arrest but only an informal detention. Conceptually. The process of reaching a compromise is called Compounding. any private person who does not have an authority to arrest. Compoundable and Non Compoundable Offences . he will be liable to be prosecuted under Section 220 of IPC. there is no need to waste court's time in conducting a trial. In such offences. Similarly. arrests a person with full knowledge that the arrest is illegal. in which a compromise can be done and a trial can be avoided. If a person who has an authority to arrest. if the offender and victim compromise. arrests a person with full knowledge that the arrest is illegal. are called . Also.resistance to or escape from lawful custody. can be prosecuted under Section 342 of IPC for wrongful confinement. Further. such offences. A person making illegal arrest also exposes himself to civil suit of false imprisonment. Informal detention or restraint of any kind by the police is not authorized by law. Differences and Short Notes. a person who is making an illegal arrest is guilty of wrongful confinement and also exposes himself to damages in a civil suit. under their power of revision in Section 401. Technically. 320(3). can allow any person to compound any compoundable offence. . etc.Compoundable offence. it is equivalent to an acquittal. etc. High Court and Court of Session may. and one where permission of the court is not required for example. Theft. defamation. However. has the right to compound the offence. Section 320 specifies two kinds of Compoundable offences . adultery. if the abetment of an offence is an offence and if the offence is compoundable then abetment is also compoundable. assault on a woman with intention to outrage her modesty. offences classified as Compoundable by Section 320 of Cr P C are compoundable. The offender cannot demand compounding as a right. Only the person. The person is usually the victim. When an offence is compounded. As per S. compounding can only be done with the leave of the court to which he is committed or to which the trial is pending. when an offender has been committed to trial or when he has been convicted and his appeal is pending. who is specified in the classification tables in Section 320. compounding cannot be done. causing hurt. criminal breach of trust. Rest of the offences are non- compoundable. If an offender is liable for enhanced punishment or a different punishment on account of a previous conviction. voluntarily causing grievous hurt.one where permission of court is required before compounding can be done for example. such permission may be granted by SC while an appeal is made against the conviction provided the parties have settled the matter amicably. However.Compoundable Offence Section 320 Non Compoundable Offence Offences classified as compoundable by S. AIR 1974. SC held that in the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary . the offender is acquitted without any trial. The case was about the matter related to Section 498A. No compromise is allowed. the parties reached a compromise but the High Court refused to quash the FIR. it cannot be compounded even with the permission of the court. the court may take the compromise into account while delivering judgment. Upon compromise. on the ground that the offence is noncompoundable. Even cour Full trial is held and acquittal or convic In Bhima Singh vs State of UP. Private party as well as society both a The victim and the offender may reach compromise with or without the permission of the court depending on the offence. AIR 2003 is interesting in this regard. The case of B S Joshi vs State of Haryana. However. SC held that when an offence is compoundable with the permission of the court. 1999. In this case. which is non-compoundable offence. SC held that when an offence is declared non-compoundable by law. 320 of CrPC Rest of the offences Offence mostly affects a private party. In Ram Lal vs State of J&K. the parties were not asking for compounding the offence but for quashing the FIR. there is no chance of conviction and in such a case the court has the power to quash the proceeding. clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulate and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. It further observed that in this case. though it may not be possible to lay down any precise. Cognizable offence and Non-cognizable offen . It observed that since because of the amicable settlement.power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code. "cognizable offence" means an offence for which. there is no such precise rule. grevious hurt. cognizable offences are of serious nature which involve imprisonment of more than three years. an offence must be declared so by the law defining that offence. In general. a police officer may. Police can start investigation without the order of a magistrate.Cognizable offence Defined in Section 2(c) . Police has to record information about a cognizable offence in writing as per Section 154. while several with bigger prison term such as False Evidence (7 yrs) or Rape by a man with his own wife of not less than 12 yrs have been declared non-cognizable. and "cognizable case" means a case in which. Several offences which carry less prison term such as rioting (2 yrs) have been declared cognizable. Examples . However. To be cognizable. in accordance with the First Schedule or under any other law for the time being in force. . Dowry death. arrest without warrant.Murder. theft. shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction. if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station. Police officer cannot investigate the case without the order of a magistrate. every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence. and be read over to the informant. dishonest misappropriation of property. and "non-cognizable case" means a case in which.Non Cognizable offence Defined in Section 2(l) . As per this section. First Information Report:The name FIR is given to the information given by any person about a cognizable offence and recorded by the police in accordance with Section 154. whether given in writing or reduced to writing as .voluntarily causing hurt. Police has to enter information in register prescribed for it and refer the informant to a magistrate.keeping a lottery office. Example ."non-cognizable offence" means an offence for which. a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant. As per Section 155. and every such information. the duty officer shall complete all the columns in the FIR register with the information given by the complainant. defined FIR as so . Thus. So. AIR 1960. However. he directs the complainant to put his statement in writing. . the offence must be a cognizable offence. FIR is nothing but information of the nature of a complaint or accusation about a cognizable offence given by any person to the police so that the police can start investigation.aforesaid. once the duty officer is certain that the offence alleged to have been committed is a cognizable offence. He shall then read out all the contents of the FIR registered to the complainant. shall be signed by the person giving it. for police to investigate the matter. by whomsoever given. and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf. he should sign the FIR. The police is not allowed to investigate a non-cognizable offence without an order from a magistrate. SC in the case of State of Bombay vs Rusy Mistry. When a person reports any information about a cognizable offence to the police. to the officer in charge of a police station in relation to the commission of a cognizable offence and which is first in point of time and on the strength of which the investigation into that offence is commenced. the police is bound to register a case and proceed with investigation.A FIR means the information. Once the complainant is certain that all the details have been correctly written. In the presence of the complainant. The informant is not required to prove his allegations in any manner at the police station. The facts must divulge at least some concrete information about the offence committed. 1972. In case of Tapinder Singh vs State. The FIR is a statement by the complainant of an alleged offence. SC held that when a telephone message did not disclose the names of the accused nor did it disclose the commission of a cognizable offence. Evidentiary Value of FIR A FIR is not substantive evidence that is. the criminal proceeding instituted on the basis of the FIR should be quashed. it cannot be called a FIR. In case of State of UP vs R K Shrivastava. SC held that if the allegations made in an FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence. However. verify details and substantiate the charges or otherwise. 1989. the statement that contains enough information to allow the police to proceed with investigation is recorded as FIR. it is not evidence of the .FIR merely contains the facts of the offence as known by the informant. Usually. the facts must not be vague. It is the job of the police to ascertain facts. Sometimes multiple persons may report the same incident and in such situation the police must use commonsense and record one statement as FIR. Summons Case and Warrant Case As per Section 2(w). if the informant is called as a witness in a trial. in case of Harpal Singh vs State of HP. For example. "warrant-case" means a case relating to an offence punishable with death. As FIR can also be used in cross examination of the informant. imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years. if the FIR is made by the accused himself. Cr P C classifies an . There must be a reasonable cause for the delay. it is very important since it conveys the earliest information about the occurrence of an offence and it can be used to corroborate the information under Section 157 of Indian Evidence Act or to contradict him under Section 145 of Indian Evidence Act. A FIR can also be used as a dying declaration under Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act. However. It was held that the delay was reasonable because it involved considerable matter of honor for the family and that required time for the family to decide whether to take the matter to court or not. the FIR was registered after 10 days. However. and not being a warrantcase and as per Section 2 (x). It is considered that FIR has a better corroborative value if it is recorded before there is time and opportunity to embellish or before the memory of the information becomes hazy. "summons-case" means a case relating to an offence. it cannot be used against him because of Section 25 of Evidence act which forbids any confession made to the police to be used against the accused. involving rape.facts which it mentions. 1981. a summons case can be converted into a warrant case if the case relates to an offence that entails more than 6 months of imprisonment as punishment and the judge feels that in the interest of justice it the case should be tried as a warrant case. As per S. No such power to the magistrate in summons case. imprisonment for life. . Trial of a warrant case as a summons case it is a serious irregularity and the trial is vitiated if the accused has been prejudiced. the accused may plead guilty and the magistrate may convict him on his discretion. Trial of a summons case as a warrant case is an irregularity which is curable under Section 465. 241. Thus. if the accused pleads guilty. if the complainant is absent or if the complainant dies. and a trial procedure as summons case or warrant case. 255.one for case instituted upon a police report and one for case instituted otherwise than on a police report. The complainant may. with the permission of the court. Accused my plead guilty by post without appearing before the magistrate. When a summons case is tried as a warrant case and if the accused is discharged under S 245. or no charge is framed. Warrant case Cr PC prescribes two procedures for the trial of a warrant case my magistrate . withdraw the complaint against the accused. in his discretion. the terms summons case and warrant case are in reference to the procedure adopted for the trial of the case. When a warrant case is tried as a summons case and if the accused is acquitted under S. After the charge is framed. All cases which are not punishable by death. The complainant may. the acquittal will only amount to discharge. the magistrate must record the plea of the accused and may. convict him on such plea. 252. if he is charged with several offences and convicted on one or more of them. A warrant case may contain charges that reflect a summons case. the difference between the two can be seen from the point of view of their trial procedures as highlighted below D2CCPAWO Summons Case Cr P C prescribes only one procedure for all summons cases. No charge needs to be framed only the particulars of the offence needs to be conveyed to the accused.offence as either cognizable or non-cognizable. The accused may be acquitted. A summons case cannot have charges that require a warrant case. As per S. A charge needs to be framed against the accused. Conversion As per Section 259. the discharge will amount to acquittal. with the permission of the court. Thus. Magistrate can discharge the accused if complainant is absent. or for more than two years are summons cases. Accused gets only one opportunity. or if the offence is compoundable and non cognizable. Accused must appear personally. withdraw the remaining charges against an accused. whether instituted upon a police report or otherwise. the magistrate may take evidence regarding previous conviction not admitted by the accused. A warrant case cannot be converted into a summons case. After convicting the accused. or for more than two years are warrant cases. .Accused may get more than one opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witness. All cases which are punishable by death. A charge under a warrant case cannot be split up into its constituents for trial under summons case. imprisonment for life.