CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
VIKAS GARG
(Querist) 12 April 2008
This query is : Resolved
Could any body explain section 170 of the code of criminal procedure 1973?
Manish Singh
(Expert) 13 April 2008
Sec 170 of CrPC: Cases to be sent to Magistrate when evidence is sufficient.
(1) If, upon an investigation under this Chapter, it appears to the officer in charge of the police station that there is sufficient evidence or reasonable ground as aforesaid, such officer shall forward the accused under custody to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence upon a police report and to try the accused or commit him for trial, or, if the offence is bailable and the accused is able to give security from him for his appearance before such Magistrate on a day fixed and for his attendance from day to day before such Magistrate until otherwise directed.
(2) When the officer in charge of a police station forwards an accused person to a Magistrate or takes security for his appearance before such Magistrate under this section, he shall send to such Magistrate any weapon or other article which it may be necessary, to produce before him, and shall require the complainant (if any) and so many of the persons who appear to such officer to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case as he may think necessary, to execute a bond to appear before the Magistrate as thereby directed and prosecute or give evidence (as the case may be) in the matter of the charge against the accused.
(3) If the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate is mentioned in the bond, such court shall be held to include any court to which such Magistrate may refer the case for inquiry or trial, provided reasonable notice of such reference is given to such complainant or persons.
(4) The officer in whose presence the bond is executed shall deliver a copy thereof to one of the persons who executed it, and shall then send to the Magistrate the original with his report.
Now to understand the section go through the following interpretation made by the HC of Delhi :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHIAT NEW DELHI.
SUBJECT:
Crl.M(M) 3875/2003
Date of Decision: January 28, 2004
Section 170-173 Cr. P.C.
Court On Its Own Motion
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation ...Respondents
Through : Mr. K.K. Sud, ASG, with Mr. Neeraj Jain, Advocate for respondent-CBI.
Mr.Sidharth Luthra,Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar,Advocates for the accused.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.D.KAPOOR
1.Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed
to see the judgment?
2.To be referred to the reporter or not?
3.Whether the judgment should be referred in the Digest?
J.D.KAPOOR, J
1. Having come across the following news item in a national daily "Statesman"of 16th September, 2003 this Court took suo moto notice as prima facie illegality in the order was writ large on the face, summoned the record, noticed the CBI and stayed its operation. The news item reads as follows:-
"Special Court returns CBI charge-sheet
Statesman News Service
NEW DELHI, Sept. 15.- The Central Bureau of Investigation was at the receiving end of the ire of a special court today with the judge declining to accept its chargesheet against an IRS official-allegedly involved in a fake visa racket during his posting in Tanzania and snubbed it for not arresting him during the investigation.
Additional session Judge Mr. Prem Kumar returned the chargesheet to the agency saying it was not observing a uniform policy or norm in arresting accused persons during investigations. The court rejected CBI contention that provisions of Section 170 Cr.P.C., which requires the investigating officer to forward the accused under custody to a magistrate, did not apply in the present case.
SANJAY DIXIT
(Expert) 16 June 2008
Nothing left to say after such a detailed and informative reply by Manish. Thanks dear Manish.
