Latest Update

FIR  and Investigation  -  FIR  Is not a gospel truth – The view taken by the Kerala High Court in Kader vs. State of Kerala, 2001 CriLJ 4044 that “merely because a detecting officer himself is investigating officer or the officer of the same ranks as that of the detecting officer is investigating the case and files report before the Court will not vitiate the proceedings under N.D.P.S. act in the absence of proof of specific prejudice to the accused” - It tantamounts to holding that the F.I.R. was a gospel truth, making investigation an empty formality if not a farce - The right of the accused to a fair investigation and fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution will stand negated in that event, with arbitrary and uncanalised powers vested with the police in matters relating to the NDPS Act and similar laws carrying a reverse burden of proof - An investigation is a systemic collection of facts for the purpose of describing what occurred and explaining why it occurred - The word systemic suggests that it is more than a whimsical process. An investigator will collect the facts relating to the incident under investigation - The fact is a mere information and is not synonymous with the truth - Constitution of India , Article 21.

 

Held, view taken by the Kerala High Court in Kader vs. State of Kerala, 2001 CriLJ 4044 does to meet our approval where it was held that “Unlike usual cases under the Criminal Procedure Code, in cases under the NDPS Act, by the time of arrest, main part of investigation will be completed and duty of the investigating officer is mainly in sending the samples for chemical analysis and other routine work and there is no likelihood of any prejudice in usual circumstances. Therefore, we are of the opinion that merely because a detecting officer himself is investigating officer or the officer of the same ranks as that of the detecting officer is investigating the case and files report before the Court will not vitiate the proceedings under N.D.P.S. act in the absence of proof of specific prejudice to the accused”  - It tantamounts to holding that the F.I.R. was a gospel truth, making investigation an empty formality if not a farce - The right of the accused to a fair investigation and fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution will stand negated in that event, with arbitrary and uncanalised powers vested with the police in matters relating to the NDPS Act and similar laws carrying a reverse burden of proof.  Kader vs. State of Kerala, 2001 CriLJ 4044 is, overruled. We approve the view taken in Naushad vs. State of Kerala, 2000 (1) KLT 785.  (2018)2 SC eJournal 1314

DOWNLOAD JUDGEMENT


  • FIR  - Delay in lodging - Occurrence had taken place at about 2.00 p.m. on 9.10.1983 and the complaint had been lodged at about 6.15 p.m. on the same day, on which the case came to be registered -  As mentioned in the FIR, the police station was situated at a distance of 54 kms. from the occurrence place -  In such circumstances there is no delay in lodging the complaint  Criminal Trial. (2016)3 PLRSC 815