Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 22 (0.32 seconds)
Pradeep Kumar Gathania vs State & Anr on 27 March, 2015 cites

Emperor vs Khwaja Nazir Ahmed on 17 October, 1944

"25. There is a clear-cut and well demarcated sphere of activity in the field of crime detection and crime Crl.MC Nos.5863/2014, 3736/2014 & W.P.(Crl.) No.2585/2014 Page 23 of 26 punishment. Investigation of an offence is the field exclusively reserved for the executive through the police department the superintendence over which vests in the State Government. The executive which is charged with a duty to keep vigilance over law and order situation is obliged to prevent crime and if an offence is alleged to have been committed it is its bounded duty to investigate into the offence and bring the offender to book. Once it investigates and finds an offence having been committed it is its duty to collect evidence for the purpose of proving the offence. Once that is completed and the investigating officer submits report to the court requesting the court to take cognizance of the offence under Section 190 of the Code its duty comes to an end. On a cognizance of the offence being taken by the court the police function of investigation comes to an end subject to the provision contained in Section 173(8), there commences the adjudicatory function of the judiciary to determine whether an offence has been committed and if so, whether by the person or persons charged with the crime by the police in its report to the court, and to award adequate punishment according to law for the offence proved to the satisfaction of the court. There is thus a well defined and well demarcated function in the field of crime detection and its subsequent adjudication between the police and the Magistrate. This had been recognised way back in King Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmad [AIR 1944 PC 18 : 1944 LR 71 IA 203, 213] where the Privy Council observed as under:
Bombay High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 628 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next