Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Sunday, November 24, 2024

Zero Tolerance For Not Filing Charge sheet In Time

Posted in: Criminal Law
Thu, Jul 1, 21, 20:56, 3 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 3915
It must be first and foremost pointed out before mentioning anything else that the charge sheet refers to a formal police record showing the names of each person who are brought into custody

It must be first and foremost pointed out before mentioning anything else that the charge sheet refers to a formal police record showing the names of each person who are brought into custody, the nature of the accusations that they are charged with and the identity of the accusers. Charge sheet is the backbone of the criminal justice system as it is only after the filing of the charge sheet that the trial of a criminal case begins and doubtless it is the police who plays the most pivotal part in filing it. It is also known as four-part charging instrument which contains:

  1. Information about the accused and the witnesses
  2. The charges and specifications;
  3. The preferring of charges and their referral to a summary;
  4. For the trial record.


Needless to say, it must be mentioned here that a charge sheet is definitely distinct from the First Information Report (FIR), which is the core document that describes a crime that has been committed. A charge sheet usually refers to one or more FIRs and charges an individual or organization for some or all of the crimes that are enumerated in those FIR(s). The importance of charge sheet in any criminal trial can be gauged from this irrefutable fact that it is only once the charge sheet has been submitted to a court of law that the prosecution proceedings against the accused commences in the judicial system.

To put it differently, it can be said with consummate ease that a charge sheet is basically a final report that is meticulously prepared by the investigation that is conducted by the police or law enforcement agencies which is imperative for proving the committing of the accusation of a crime by the accused in a criminal court of law. It is a no-brainer that the police report is usually submitted by the police officer after conducting proper investigation which is needed in order to prove that the accused is connected with any offence or has committed any offence that is punishable under any penal statute which has the effect of law in India. It has to be conceded that the report of police encapsulates all the stringent records that are needed by a Judge while judging a case starting right from the commencement of investigation procedure of lodging an FIR and which continues till the final completion of the investigation and till the final report is prepared.

Truth be told, the importance of charge sheet can be gauged from this that it is only on the basis of the charge sheet and other finding of records filed by the police that the Magistrate then frames charge against the accused after scrutinizing it properly and making a thorough pre-inquiry of it in detail to understand and determine the culpability of the accused in the crime and after duly complying with the procedural requirements as entailed in Chapter XVI of CrPC and as postulated in Section 211 of the CrPC. It is only after the filing of the charge sheet/report under Section 204 of the CrPC that the Magistrate then takes cognizance of it. We ought to remember there that under Section 173(2) of the CrPC, the charge sheet/police report is submitted to the Magistrate after completion of the investigation.

To put things in perspective, how ironical it is that usually the charge sheet is to be filed within 60 days from the date of arrest of the accused in cases triable by the lower courts and 90 days in cases triable by Court of Sessions but when it comes to the ground reality, we see as we saw in Lt Col Prasad Shrikanth Purohit's case that the Mumbai ATS which effected the arrest of Col Purohit in November 2008 in most questionable manner did not file charge sheet against him not for just 90 days or 90 weeks but for 9 years and after five years when it handed over the case to the NIA still no charge sheet was filed against him! If the case was so strong against him and he was shown by various news channels that he was the main accused in the Malegaon blast case in which about 7 Muslims were killed and many injured even though very initially even the UN agencies had attributed Pakistan based Lashkar terror outfit behind it then why no charge sheet was framed against him for 9 long years? Why judiciary did not fire the police department for not filing the charge sheet in such a sensitive case for such a long time?

It must also be asked: Why a serving senior Army Officer of the rank of Lt Colonel who had won so many citations and Army Chief's commendation card for his numerous gallantry actions in various counter insurgency operations in J&K was taken for granted and kept in jail for 9 long years without even charge sheet being filed against him? Why more than 76 serving Army Officers testified in his favour and even Maj Gen GD Bakshi (retd) as also Col RSN Singh (retd) of RAW all spoke hugely in favour of Col Purohit and even wrote cover stories on him lamenting that he was wrongly framed? Why is it that all the courts whether it is the trial court or the High Court or the Supreme Court did not say anything on it? This is what one finds most baffling as we see that even charge sheet is framed against dreaded foreign based terrorists like Pakistan based late Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab among others in time!

Could charges against Col Purohit under MCOCA be sustained? No, the Supreme Court found them not sustainable and Col Purohit got anticipatory bail after his senior counsel Harish Salve pointed out convincingly how he was kept in jail for such a long time and still even after 9 years even charge sheet was not filed against him! All the police officers who don't file the charge sheet in time must be taken to task and be punished most strictly.

Strictly speaking, it is only because nothing happens to the concerned guilty police men in uniform that they take the accused's rights for granted and keeps him/her in jail for many years and yet are not held accountable by either sending them also to jail for 14 years minimum or ordering them to pay a huge compensation to the affected accused person apart from dismissing them from service! It must be said at the risk of repetition that there has to be zero tolerance against all those police men who don't file charge sheet in time and thus make a complete mockery of the personal liberty of the accused person which cannot be ever justified under any circumstances!.

It goes without saying that India is a "democratic country" and not a "police country" where police rules and so they too must be taken to task whenever they dare to do something wrong. They should not be allowed to get away most easily! But it has to be said with utmost anguish that we see police getting away with virtually anything and everything they do and it is only in some cases that they are made to account for what they do!

Even as we hear more and more skeletons tumbling out of the closet in police department in Mumbai with the latest being encounter specialist Pradeep Sharma whom NIA arrested just recently, one is left totally appalled, aghast and ashamed to note that those Mumbai ATS police officers who had a direct role in framing Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit as a terrorist and in torturing him for a very long time are still having a free run! The 24-page handwritten complaint details the various kinds of torture that Col Purohit was subjected to. The shocking 24-page letter written by him to National Human Rights Commission in December 2013 which one can read from the website www.pgurus.com exposes shocking details of how terribly he was tortured for weeks by a Military Intelligence Officer and Maharashtra Police ATS team in October and November 2018 so that he could own up wrongly as being the mastermind behind terror attacks that happened in those times as in Malegaon! What is even more revealing is the finer points that eminent women senior journalist Madhu Kishwar has brought out in her web portal "www.manushi.in" on Lt Col Purohit's ordeal after interviewing Col Purohit's wife Aparna which is bone chilling to say the least!

If what all Col Purohit has written and Madhu Kishwar has revealed is true then one cannot but conclude that there was a big political conspiracy in cahoots with police to portray attack on Malegaon as attack by so called "Hindu Terrorists" and all this happened around virtually the same time when Mumbai 26/11 happened in which initially attempts were made by a section in the media to portray it also as attack by "Hindu Terrorists" but Pakistani terrorists Ajmal Kasab who was caught alive spilled the beans of involvement of Lashkar-e-Taiba and Pakistani handlers which included some from the Pakistani Army also! Col Purohit's case was weakened by this small yet influential section of the media which tried to portray him as a "Hindu Terrorist" who was seeking to make India a "Hindu country" instead of depicting how he was trying to expose the dangerous link of politicians with terrorists and no wonder that 26/11 attack took place just few days after his arrest! When Mumbai ATS and Mumbai police starts running after Army officers only as in case of Lt Col Prasad Shrikanth Purohit among others without any firm evidence and illegally detains them, illegally arrests them, illegally tortures them, illegally tries to implicate them in fake cases, illegally jails them for 9 years without even filing a charge sheet and brazenly ignores the ground reality then such dastardly terror attacks like 26/11 which left more than 200 people dead are bound to happen and that too days after Col Purohit was arrested most wrongly who himself was strongly after terrorists and always lead from the front in many counter insurgency operations! This is the real pinch!

In all fairness, it has to be said that police reforms as suggested by the Apex Court in Prakash Singh & Ors vs Union of India and Ors case in Writ Petition (Civil) 310 of 1996 delivered on 22 September 2006 must be now implemented in letter and spirit without fail without any changes so that far reaching much needed changes are carried out in the police department which is the crying need of the hour also! It is a sad commentary on the existing state of affairs in our country that even after 15 years of this landmark judgment we still see this nowhere being implemented which is most tragic! Supreme Court must also now order a definite time limit within which all such recommendations for police reforms are implemented at the earliest!

By all accounts, the police must always be held accountable for whatever wrong they do and especially in cases of human rights like not filing charge sheet in time due to which the accused as we saw in Lt Col Purohit's case keeps languishing in jail for 9 years without facing any trial and in so many other cases also, foisting false cases on innocent citizens, indulging in custodial torture and not lodging FIR among other crimes! Only then will they work with the sense that they cannot get away after doing anything what they want and will be held strictly liable for any wrong done just like others! This should be the order also otherwise politicians will just use them as mere agents to extort money from people as we saw recently in Maharashtra where Ministers themselves came under cloud for extorting crores of rupees through police officers due to which about 4 officers were dismissed also after the news surfaced in media!

It merits no reiteration that the police must be freed now completely from the control, clutches and cage of the politicians. Also, most significantly, there has to be total zero tolerance for police not filing charge sheet in time and for all the other wrongs it commits and judiciary too must not be just a passive, mute and helpless spectator and should take the police to task whenever it is found wanting in this regard! Only then can our criminal justice system run sincerely, smoothly and systematically as we want! No denying it!


Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top