Section 628(b) in Police Regulations, Bengal , 1943
(b)Though no exact rules can be prescribed for the investigation of gang cases, as each case has its peculiar features, the following general instructions are laid down for the guidance of police officers in such cases. Evidence on the points noted below must always be sought for and obtained, if possible :-(i)Evidence of the existence of a gang for the purpose of committing dacoity, robbery or theft during the time specified in the charges (established by proof of facts as contemplated in section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.)(ii)Evidence of the association of the suspected persons for the purpose of committing dacoities or thefts.(iii)Evidence of relationship by blood or marriage amongst the members of the gang.(iv)Evidence in corroboration of the approver's statement on material points as contemplated in section 114(6) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, duly verified by a responsible police officer.(v)Evidence of confessions of co-accused previously recorded at different times and places, (vide sections 30 and 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872).(vi)Evidence of specific cases of dacoities and thefts committed by the gang.(vii)Evidence of the recovery of property stolen in dacoities and thefts, or suspicious property found in possession of the accused.(viii)Evidence of the simultaneous absence from their homes in batches or singly of known members of the gang coincident with the occurrences of dacoities and thefts in the neighbourhood.(ix)Evidence of any increase or decrease in the number of dacoities or thefts coincident with the presence or absence of the members of the gang.(x)Evidence of the cessation of dacoities and thefts in the affected area after the arrest of the members.(xi)Evidence of the habitual commission of dacoities or thefts to be proved by an aggregate of acts.(xii)Evidence of changes of residence to avoid suspicion.(xiii)Proof of previous convictions for dacoities and thefts (the former alone can be proved in a case under section 400 of the Indian Penal Code, but convictions under sections 379, 380 and 457, etc. of the Indian Penal Code, can be proved on a charge under section 400 or 401 of the Indian Penal Code, to establish the habits of individuals or the association of the members).(xiv)Proof of orders under section 110 (a), (b) and (c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure requiring any of the accused persons to give security for his good behaviour, to prove that the person is a habitual thief (vide unreported case of Emperor v. Meher Ali Sarkar and Ors., decided on the 20th March, 1901 by J. J. Prinsep and Hill).(xv)Proof of orders for security for good behaviour, when two or more of the accused have been bound over in one proceeding under section 110 (a), (b) and (c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as evidence of association [vide section 117(4) of that Code].(xvi)Documentary evidence in the shape of relevant entries in enquiry slips, in the surveillance register, the Village Crime Note-Book, and other registers which are required by order of the Inspector-General to be maintained at a police-station. This evidence would probably be admissible under section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; but, if not, might be used under section 159 of that Act to refresh memory.
