Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a Metropolitan Magistrate can examine the investigating officer's discretion to arrest or not arrest an accused at the stage of taking cognizance and return the charge-sheet for further investigation merely because the accused were not arrested and produced in custody.
Analysis: The reference was answered by applying the settled legal position that arrest is not mandatory in every cognizable and non-bailable offence. The investigating agency is required to exercise its discretion under the Code and may proceed without arrest where investigation can be completed with cooperation of the accused. At the stage of cognizance, the Magistrate is concerned with the completeness of the charge-sheet and the evidence collected, not with substituting his view for that of the investigating officer on whether arrest was necessary. If the investigation is incomplete or the charge is not borne out by the material filed, the charge-sheet may be returned on those grounds, but not merely because the accused were not arrested.
Conclusion: The Metropolitan Magistrate cannot scrutinise the legality or propriety of the investigating officer's decision not to arrest the accused, and cannot return the charge-sheet solely for that reason.
Ratio Decidendi: Arrest is a matter of investigative necessity, not an invariable consequence of registration of a cognizable offence, and the Magistrate cannot override that discretion at the stage of cognizance merely because the accused were not arrested.