TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1987 (7) TMI 582
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....barking upon the decision of this legal point it would be desirable to point out a few dates germane to this case. The occurrence took place on 29-10-1986 and the petitioner Taj Singh was arrested as an accused on the next day, i.e. 30-10-86. The material exhibits, i.e. clothes and the knife were taken into possession by the police on 30-10-1986 and sent to CFSL on 1-1-1987 for opinion and report back to the Station House Officer of P.S. Narela and the same were dispatched by CFSL to Station House Officer, Narela vide communication dated 27-1-1987. It is not known whether it reached the Investigating Officer on that very day or on some subsequent date. It was, however, stated at the Bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Investigating Officer though relied upon the report of CFSL, did not append the same with the charge-sheet while forwarding the charge-sheet to the Magistrate for taking cognizance of the offence under S. 190 of the Code. Whether the Investigating Officer had actually received or not the CFSL report when he forwarded the challan on the 90th day, i.e. 27-1-1987, the fact remains that the charge-sheet was complete minus the CFSL report. 3. Under th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce, and, on the expiry of the said period of ninety days, or sixty days, as the case may be, the accused person shall be released on bail if he is prepared to and does furnish bail, and every person released on bail under this sub-section shall be deemed to be so released under the provisions of Chapter XXXIII for the purposes of that Chapter; (b) no Magistrate shall authorise detention in any custody under this section unless the accused is produced before him; (c) no Magistrate of the second class, not specially empowered in this behalf by the High Court, shall authorise detention in the custody of the police. (Explanation I.- for the avoidance of doubts, it is hereby declared that, notwithstanding the expiry of the period specified in paragraph (a), the accused shall be detained in custody so long as he does not furnish bail) (Explanation II).- If any question arises whether an accused person was produced before the Magistrate as required under paragraph (b), the production of the accused person may be proved by his signature on the order authorising detention. ......................................." 4. Thus, the investig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... (ii) The officer shall also communicate, in such manner as may be prescribed by the State Government, the action taken by him to the person, if any, by whom the information relating to the commission of the offence was first given. (3) Where a superior officer of police has been appointed under Section 158, the report shall, in any case in which the State Government by general or special order so directs, be submitted through that officer, and he may, pending the orders of the Magistrate, direct the officer in charge of the police station to make further investigation. (4) Whenever it appears from a report forwarded under this section that the accused has been released on his bond, the Magistrate-shall make such order for the discharge of such bond or otherwise as he thinks fit. (5) When such report is in respect of a case to which Section 170 applies, the police officer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the report - (a) all documents or relevant extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation; (b) the statement recorded under Section 161 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es (c) and (d) of Sub-section (2)(i) of Section 173 which pertain to the names of the persons who appear to be acquainted with the circumstances of the case and whether any offence appears to have been committed and, if so, by whom. When the Investigating Officer is ready with these requirements, the other requirements being not very difficult to know, the police report is complete as per its definition given in S. 2(r) as per sub-section (2) of S. 173 of the Code. The persons contemplated in Clause (c) of sub-section (2)(i) of S. 173 appear to be the witnesses of the occurrence or who are otherwise in the know of the facts of the case but do not appear to include an expert of CFSL or any other Government Scientific Expert mentioned in sub-section (4) of Section 293 of the Code whose reports have been made admissible under S. 293 by tendering the same in evidence without any formal proof thereof. The following are the Government Scientific Experts mentioned in sub-section (4) of S. 293 :- "(a) any Chemical Examiner or Assistant Chemical Examiner to Government; (b) the Chief Inspector of Explosives; (c) the Director of the Finger Print Bureau; (d)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the offence. It may he necessary to reproduce sub-section (5) of S. 173 of the Code and the same is set out below :- "(5) When such report is in respect of a case to which section 170 applies, the police officer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the report - (a) all documents or relevant extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely other than those already sent to the Magistrate during investigation; (b) the statements recorded under section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses." 10. This contention does not appear to be correct for the reason that sub-section (5) of S. 173 appears to cast on the investigating officer only an additional duty of sending along with the report documents or extracts thereof on which the prosecution proposes to rely, and this additional duty cannot be construed as in any manner prejudicing the police report envisaged in sub-section (2) of S. 173, and this additional duty appears to have been necessitated to enable the Magistrate taking cognizance of the case to comply with the mandatory provision of law contained in S. 207 of the Code for....