Crpc Project

Transcript

DATED : 21 ST APRIL, 2017 CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND THE ROLE OF COURT AND POLICE IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN INDIA (PROJECT SUBMTTED FOR THE PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE DEGREE OF LL.B.) BATCH : 2015-18 SUBMITTED TO: MR. SURYA DEV VERMA FACULTY OF LAW SUBMITTED BY: MADHUR MEENAKHSHI BHATTACHARYA LL.B., 4TH SEMESTER  SIDDHARTHA LAW COLLEGE, DEHRADUN (AFFILIATED TO UTTARAKHAND TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, DEHRADUN) DEHRADUN) 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to Siddhartha Law College, our respected Principal, Dr. Sharafat Ali , our respected teacher Mr. Surya Dev Verma and every member of the Faculty, Staff and my fellow Students who have helped me in setting up this Project on this very interesting topic “CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND THE ROLE OF COURT AND POLICE IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN INDIA”  within a very limited period of time. I am thankful to each and everyone for their provision of expertise and technical support in the implementation. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS SL.NO. TOPIC PAGE NO. 1. OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT 4 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 5 3. INTRODUCTION 6 4. PROCEDURE OF ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL 7 JUSTICE IN INDIA 5. EVOLUTION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 12 6. NEED FOR SPEEDING UP THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE 15 SYSTEM 7. ROLE OF COURTS AND POLICE 17 8. MALIMATH COMMITTEE REPORT 22 9. CONCLUSION 23 3 1. OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT This project paper aims at a brief overview of the Criminal Justice System and the Role Of Court and Police in the Administration of Criminal Justice in India according to the provisions of the Supreme Law of the Land, i.e., The Constitution of India, The Indian Penal Code (1860), The Indian Evidence Act (1872) and The Code of Criminal Procedure (1973). The project paper is divided into various sections, ranging from Introduction to Conclusion. The  project author humbly believes that the present work could not give a complete picture on such a wide and dynamic topic as Criminal Justice System and the Role of Court and Police in the Administration of Criminal Justice in India. So, it would be an injustice to claim that this work would herald a new dimension on the study of this field of the Constitution and Criminal Law. However, the project author has tried level best to garner a brief overview of the earlier works done on the same area and the complementary roles of police and the court have been discussed in context of the investigation of cases. The inherent power of the High Court has also been discussed in the paper elaborately. India has adopted an adversarial system of justice which views Court as a passive demonstrator, the viability of this model and its difference from the inquisitorial system is dealt with in length. Lastly the reforms suggested by the Malimath Committee Report are analyzed in light of the simultaneous functioning of the court and the  police. Subsequently, the Conclusion part would shade light on the theme of this paper coupled with the project author’s take in this regard. 4 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The Doctrinal or Traditional or Non-Empirical Legal Research Methodology   has been followed in this project paper. PRIMARY SOURCES:  THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA  THE INDIAN PENAL CODE (1860)  THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT (1872)  THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (1973) SECONDARY SOURCES:      CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OF INDIA Dr. J.N. Pandey Central Law Agency Allahabad TEXT BOOK ON THE INDIAN PENAL CODE K.D.Gaur Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi THE LAW OF EVIDENCE Batuk Lal Central Law Agency Allahabad THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 S.N. Misra Central Law Publications Allahabad INTERNET SOURCES : www.google.com www.wikipedia.org www.preservearticles.com www.ielrc.org www.lawteacher.net www.country-data.com www.legalservicesindia.com 5 3. INTRODUCTION The essential object of criminal law is to protect society against criminals and law-breakers. For this purpose the law holds out threats of punishments to prospective lawbreakers as well as attempts to make the actual offenders suffer the prescribed punishments for their crimes. Therefore, criminal law, in its wider sense, consists of both the substantive criminal law and the  procedural (or adjective) criminal law. Substantive criminal law defines offences and prescribes  punishments for the same, while the procedural law administers the substantive law. Therefore the two main statues which deals with administration of criminal cases in our country are Criminal Procedural Code i.e. Cr.P.C. and Indian Penal Code i.e. IPC being procedural and substantive respectively. However with the changing times the societal norms also change and  people who are part of this society have to accept this change either by way of compromise or any other way in order to adjust and make them still the part of the very same society. In earlier days there was no criminal law in uncivilized society. Every man was liable to be attacked in his  person or property at any time by any one. The person attacked either succumbed or over powered his opponent. "A tooth for a tooth, an eye for an eye, a life for a life" was the forerunner of criminal justice. As time advanced, the injured person agreed to accept compensation, instead of killing his adversary. Subsequently, a sliding scale came into existence for satisfying ordinary offences. Such a system gave birth to archaic criminal law. Judiciary and Police are the two integral parts of the society for securing justice. They are pillars of the administration whose role is to ensure that the individual liberty is protected and the crime from the society is eliminated. The two institutions are very much interlinked in their sphere of functioning and their mode of working. Though the functions and powers of courts and the  police are inherently connected yet both are quite distinct in terms of the statutory powers conferred on them. 6 4. PROCEDURE OF ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN INDIA The procedure of administration of criminal justice in our country is divided into three stages namely investigation, inquiry and trial. The Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 provides for the  procedure to be followed in investigation, inquiry and trial, for every offence under the Indian Penal Code or under any other law.   COGNIZABLE OFFENCES.  NON COGNIZABLE OFFENCES.  INQUIRY.  INVESTIGATION. Section 2(c) of the Code defines ‘Cognizable Offence ’ and ‘Cognizable case’ as follows: - “Cognizable Offence" means an offence means an offence for which, and “Cognizable case" means a case in which, a police officer may, in accordance with the First Schedule or under any other law for the time being in force, arrest without warrant". Whereas Section 2(l) defines “Non-cognizable offence " means an offence for which, and “noncognizable case" means a case in which, a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant" Section 2 (g) defines “Inquiry" means every inquiry, other than a trial, conducted under this Code by a Magistrate or court; and Section 2 (h)  defines "Investigation " includes all the  proceedings under this Code for the collection of evidence conducted by a police officer or by any person (other than a Magistrate) who is autho rized by a Magistrate in this behalf, Therefore for a dispute to be resolved the said case has to go through the three stages i.e. inquiry investigation and trial and after this process is completed the judgement of the court is passed by the judge who decides the case and its outcome. Although the said process appears to simple and  plain on paper but in practicality is cumbersome and time consuming which is defeating the main essence of a criminal system i.e. fair and expeditious justice and hence warrants a change now. 7 INVESTIGATION Investigation is a preliminary stage conducted by the police and usually starts after the recording of a First Information Report (FIR) in the police station. Section 154 provides that any information received in the police station in respect of a cognizable offence shall be reduced into writing, got signed by the informant and entered in the concerned register. Section 156(1) requires the concerned officer to investigate the facts and circumstances of such a case without any order from the Magistrate in this behalf. If Magistrate receives information about commission of a cognizable offence he can order an investigation. In such cases citizen is spared the trouble and expense of investigating and prosecuting the case. Section 157  of the code provides for the procedure for investigation which is as; if the officer-in- charge of a police station suspects the commission of an offence, from statement of FIR or when the magistrate directs or otherwise, the officer or any subordinate officer is duty-bound to  proceed to the spot to investigate facts and circumstances of the case and if necessary, takes measures for the discovery and arrest of the offender. It primarily consists of ascertaining facts and circumstances of the case, includes all the efforts of a police officer for collection of evidence: proceeding to the spot; ascertaining facts and circumstances; discovery and arrest of the suspected offender; collection of evidence relating to the commission of offence, which may consist of the examination of various persons including the accused and taking of their statements in writing and the search of places or seizure of things considered necessary for the investigation and to be produced at the trial; formation of opinion as to whether on the basis of the material collected there is a case to place the accused before a magistrate for trial and if so, taking the necessary steps for filing the charge-sheet. The investigation procedure ends with a submission of a police report to the magistrate under Section 173   of the code this report is  basically a conclusion which an investigation officer draws on the basis of evidence collected. INQUIRY Inquiry dealt under Sections 177-189   of the code which consists of a magistrate, either on receiving a police report or upon a complaint by any other person, being satisfied of the facts. Lastly, the third stage is trial. Trial is the judicial adjudication of a person’s guilt or innocence. 8 Under the Cr.P.C., criminal trials have been categorized into three divisions having different  procedures, called warrant, summons and summary trials. Section 2(x) of the Cr.P.C defines Warrant-case i.e. “Warrant-case " means a case relating to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years; A warrant case relates to offences punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years. Trial of warrant cases is dealt under Sections 238250 of the code. A summons case means a case relating to an offence not being a warrant case, implying all cases relating to offences punishable with imprisonment not exceeding two years. In respect of summons cases, there is no need to frame a charge. The court gives substance of the accusation, which is called “notice", to the accused when the person appears in pursuance to the summons. The court has the power to convert a summons case into a warrant case, if the magistrate thinks that it is in the interest of justice. The provisions regarding the procedure to be followed in summons case is dealt under Sections 251-259  of the Cr.P.C. Summary trials  are dealt under Section 260  –  265 of the Cr.P.C the procedure is as provided; the high court may empower magistrates of first class to try certain offences in a summary way where as second class magistrates can summarily try an offence only if it is punishable only with a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months. In a summary trial no sentence of imprisonment for a term exceeding three months can be passed in any conviction. The particulars of the summary trial are entered in the record of the court and in every case which is tried summarily in which the accused does not plead guilty the magistrate records the substance of the evidence and a judgment containing a brief statement of the reasons for the finding. The common features of the trials in all three of the aforementioned procedures may be roughly  broken into the following distinct stages: 1. FRAMING OF CHARGE OR GIVING OF NOTICE This is the beginning of a trial. At this stage, the judge is required to weigh the evidence for the  purpose of finding out whether or not a prima facie case against the accused has been made out. 9 In case the material placed before the court discloses grave suspicion against the accused that has not been properly explained, the court frames the charge and proceeds with the trial. If, on the contrary, upon consideration of the record of the case and documents submitted and after hearing the accused person and the prosecution in this behalf, the judge considers that there is not sufficient ground for proceeding, the judge discharges the accused and records reasons for doing so. The words “not sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused" mean that the judge is required to apply a judicial mind in order to determine whether a case for trial has been made out  by the prosecution. It may be better understood by the proposition that whereas a strong suspicion may not take the place of proof at the trial stage, yet it may be sufficient for the satisfaction of the court in order to frame a charge against the accused person. The charge is read over and explained to the accused. If pleading guilty, the judge shall record the plea and may, with discretion convict him however if the accused pleads not guilty and claims trial, then trial begins. Trial starts after the charge has been framed and the stage  preceding it is called inquiry. After the inquiry, the charge is prepared and after the formulation of the charge the trial of the accused starts. A charge is nothing but formulation of the accusation made against a person who is to face trial for a specified offence. It sets out the offence that was allegedly committed. 2. RECORDING OF PROSECUTION EVIDENCE After the charge is framed, the prosecution is asked to examine its witnesses before the court. The statement of witnesses is on oath. This is called examination-in-chief. The accused has a right to cross-examine all the witnesses presented by the prosecution. Section 309 of the Cr.P.C further provides that the proceeding shall be held as expeditiously as  possible and in particular, when the examination of witnesses has once begun, the same shall be continued day-to-day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined. 3. STATEMENT OF ACCUSED 10 The court has powers to examine the accused at any stage of inquiry or trial for the purpose of eliciting any explanation against incriminating circumstances appearing before it. However, it is mandatory for the court to question the accused after examining the evidence of the prosecution if it incriminates the accused. This examination is without oath and before the accused enters a defence. The purpose of this examination is to give the accused a reasonable opportunity to explain incriminating facts and circumstances in the case. 4. DEFENCE EVIDENCE If after taking the evidence for the prosecution, examining the accused and hearing the  prosecution and defence, the judge considers that there is no evidence that the accused has committed the offence, the judge is required to record the order of acquittal. However, when the accused is not acquitted for absence of evidence, a defence must be entered and evidence adduced in its support. The accused may produce witnesses who may be willing to depose in support of the defence. The accused person is also a competent witness under the law. The accused may apply for the issue of process for compelling attendance of any witness or the  production of any document or thing. The witnesses produced by him are cross-examined by the  prosecution. The accused person is entitled to present evidence in case he so desires after recording of his statement. The witnesses produced by him are cross-examined by the prosecution. Most accused  persons do not lead defence evidence. One of the major reasons for this is that India follows the common law system where the burden of proof is on the prosecution, and the degree of proof required in a criminal trial is beyond reasonable do ubt. 5. FINAL ARGUMENTS This is the final stage of the trial. The provisions of the Cr.P.C provide that when examination of the witnesses for the defence, if any, is complete, the prosecutor shall sum up the prosecution case and the accused is entitled to reply. The same is provided for under Section 234 of the code. 6. JUDGMENT 11 After conclusion of arguments by the prosecutor and defence, the judge pronounces his judgment in the trial. Here it is relevant to mention that the Cr.P.C also contains detailed provisions for compounding of offences. It lists various compoundable offences under table 1 of the Indian Penal Code which may be compounded by the specified aggrieved party without the permission of the court and certain offences under table 2 that can be compounded only after securing the  permission of the court compounding of offences also brings a trial to an end. 5. EVOLUTION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM In our criminal jurisprudence, an accused is presumed to be innocent till proven guilty, the  burden of proof being on the prosecution; he is entitled to a true investigation, and fair and open trial, and the prosecution is enjoined to play a balanced role in the trial of an offence. The standard of proof required is ‘proof beyond reasonable doubt’. Articles 20 and 22 of the Constitution of India, falling in the chapter on fundamental rights, guarantee that no person shall  be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act or omission charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence ( the rule against ex post facto penal law); no person shall be prosecuted and punished twice for the same offence (the rule against double jeopardy); every accused enjoys the right against self-incrimination; every person who is arrested is entitled to be informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest as well as the right to consult and be defended by a lawyer of his choice; every person who is arrested and detained in custody is required to be produced  before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours, excluding journey time, and cannot be further detained without the magisterial authority. Writ of habeas corpus is a remedy available under our Constitution to question detentions which are illegal. Article 21 of our Constitution guarantees protection of life and personal liberty and enjoins that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. Through judicial interpretation, this fundamental right has been elaborated and expanded tremendously. The ‘procedure’ prescribed by law has to be ‘reasonable, fair and  just’. A right to early end of criminal proceedings through a speedy trial is a part of right to life. Right against solitary confinement, right against bar fetters, right against handcuffing, right 12 against custodial violence, right to human conditions in prisons and protective homes, and right to legal aid are but some of the rights which have been held to flow from this article. Avoidable arrests are frowned upon by courts. A person arrested cannot be subjected to more restraint than is necessary to prevent his escape. Then, there are well-meaning provisions concerning bail. The Indian Penal Code 1860, the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, along with parts of the Indian Evidence Act 1872, constitute the essence of Indian criminal law. A large number of special and local laws take care of various other antisocial activities. Members of the armed forces face trial for offences by a Court Martial under special Acts owing to their special requirements. Criminal Justice refers to the agencies of government charged with enforcing law, adjudicating crime, and correcting criminal conduct. The criminal justice system is essentially an instrument of social control: society considers some behaviours so dangerous and destructive that it either strictly controls their occurrence or outlaws them outright. It is the job of the agencies of justice to prevent these behaviours by apprehending and punishing transgressors or deterring their future occurrence. Although society maintains other forms of social control, such as the family, school, and church, they are designed to deal with moral, not legal, misbehaviour. Only the criminal  justice system has the power to control crime and punish criminals. So, the main objectives of the criminal justice system can be categorized as follows:  To prevent the occurrence of crime.  To punish the transgressors and the criminals.  To rehabilitate the transgressors and the criminals.  To compensate the victims as far as possible.  To maintain law and order in the society.  To deter the offenders from committing any criminal act in the future. Of late, the relevance of our criminal justice system- both substantive and procedural- a replica of the British colonial jurisprudence, is being seriously questioned. Perhaps the criminal judicial system is based on the laws that are arbitrary and operate to the disadvantages of the poor. They 13 have always come across as law for the poor rather than law of the poor. It operates on the weaker sections of the community, notwithstanding constitutional guarantee to the contrary. There are hardly any people to advocate for the new laws to help the poor, there are practically none to pressurize the government and the legislature to amend the laws to protect the week and the poor. Even after five decades of independence, no serious efforts have been made to redraft  penal norms, radicalize punitive processes, humanize prison houses and make anti-social and anti-national criminals etc. incapable of escaping the legal coils. The criminal justice system is cumbersome, expensive and cumulatively disastrous. The poor can never reach the temple of justice because of heavy costs involved in gaining access and the mystique of legal ethos. The hierarchy of courts, with appeals after appeals, puts legal justice  beyond the reach of the poor. Making the legal process costlier is an indirect denial of justice to the people and this hits hard on the lowest of the low in society. The importance of these developments to the delivery system of justice can’t be ignored. They have revolutionized our  judicial jurisprudence and will go a long way in giving relief to the large masses and the common man. In view of the importance of the subject matter, it is proposed to explain in brief some of the important areas of the criminal justice system that have attracted the attention of the courts in recent years. These are: 1. Public interest litigation. 2. Bail justice jurisprudence. 3. Prison justice. 4. Compensation to the victims. 5. Legal aid and legal services. 14 6. NEED FOR SPEEDING UP THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM “JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED”  The reason one goes to court is to get justice, and “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied” Unfortunately the judicial system in India is based on Evidences and facts not conscience or morals, so it should be easier, once having the facts at hand, all it needs is argument and hearing and quicker pronouncement of Justice. A judicial system that cares only about evidences and facts shouldn’t worry about taming the souls of the plaintiff and the defendant with time rather give justice as quick as it can, this delay/denial of justice leads to increasing “Out of Court settlements” which are cheaper and quicker thereby leading to the loss of trust in our Judicial System. As Chief Justice Burger has noted: “A sense of confidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a  free people and three things could destroy that confidence and do incalculable damage to  society: that people come to believe that ineffi ciency and delay will drain even a just judgment of i ts value; that people who have long been exploited in the smaller transactions of daily li fe come to believe that courts cannot vindicate their legal rights fr om fraud and over-r eaching; that people come to believe the law in the larger sense cannot fulfill i ts primary function to  protect them and their families in their homes, at their work, and on the public streets”. This has been explicitly made so in the Article 39-A of the Constitution that directs the State –  to secure equal justice and free legal aid for the citizens. But the experiences of last 57 years show that the State has failed squarely on addressing some very basic issues – quick and inexpensive  justice and protecting the rights of poor and the vulnerable. The justice delivery system is on the verge of collapse with more than 30 million cases clogging the system. There are cases that take so much of time that even a generation is too short to get any type of redressal. It will take about 300 years to clear the backlog of cases in Indian courts is proof enough that our criminal justice system is sick, stagnant and in urgent need of a complete overhaul. In the Uphaar case   it is shocking that it took six years to establish that the 59 people died  because of criminal negligence on the part of the c inema management and the Delhi government. 15 It was clear from day one that nobody would have died had the cinema followed safety rules but  because the wheels of Indian justice move at the pace of our national vehicle –  the bullock cart –  it took six years for justice to be done. And, if the Ansal family and the guilty officials decide to appeal it could be many more years before justice is really done. CAUSES OF DELAY:  Strength of Judges are inadequate according to population and bunch of cases: As of January 2005, pending cases in the Supreme Court number 30,000, in high courts over 33.79 lakh and in subordinate courts over 2.35 crore –   a totally unacceptable situation. Much of this is due to shortage of judges. The ratio of judges to population is 10.5 to one million, the lowest in the world. Even this low level is not reached because of the accumulation of vacancies in the Benches -140 against the approved strength of 668 judges in high courts and 2000 against 15000 in subordinate courts.  The infrastructure of the lower courts is very disappointing. Though, the Supreme Court and High Courts are having good infrastructure but this in not the same position with lower courts. The Courts have no convenient building or physical facilities. The executive has failed to provide necessary infrastructure to enable judiciary and function normally. Good library, requisite furniture, sufficient staff and reasonable space are the need of the qualitative justice. In some courts security systems is also not good. The legal profession is one of the most struggling profession but no social security scheme is available for lawyers, some financial aid should be provided to Bar associations or the new beginners by the government. The good working condition of the lawyers would help in the excellence of service and qualitative justice to the litigating public.  Competency of the Other Staff in Court: It should also be kept in mind that not only Judges and Advocates be competent but also the administrative and clerical staff. The clerical staff must be free from all type of corruption. This is the era of computerization. The highly technical and competitive clerical staff will also help in 16 speedy course. We all know how much time is taken in getting merely a copy of the judgment? It is hard that money is used to speed up the process. The bribe giver does not wish, to get anything done unlawfully, but merely wants to speed up the process of movement of files and communication relating to decision. Certain sections of staff concerned do work only after taking money.  Investigative agencies generally delay: The investigation of crime It is generally heard that the accused gets bail as the investigating agency failed to submit charge sheet within statutory period. The combination of several functions, such as crime investigation, riot control, intelligence gathering, and security of VIPs  by a single police force has a devastating effect on the criminal justice system. Nowadays, the crime investigation is not immune from the partisan politics. The power of the government to drop criminal charges against the accused has further abused it. The lethargic police investigation is also a ground of slow process of law. 7. ROLE OF COURTS AND POLICE Court is called the temple of Justice. A Court is an independent and impartial body whose function is to decide whether the accused person is guilty or not. In a criminal justice system, maximum faith is placed in the functioning of the court right from the arrest to the closure of the case. The code confers several rights upon the court to reach to the right decision and do complete justice to a case. Section 165 of the evidence act empowers the judge to ask for a  proper explanation of the facts or evidence from the parties concerned and the police. This section is meant to help the judge reach a conclusive opinion after taking note of all the relevant facts present in the case. A judge has power to ask for any relevant document at any time and the  parties are not entitled to object to such questions and orders of the court. Also, in order to appreciate the evidence of the case, It sometimes become necessary to take an inspection of the  place related to the offence, Section 310 envisages such a power upon the magistrate to have a local inspection of the place concerned. 17 In relation to the investigation of the case, Section 157 gives the magistrate a power to direct an investigation in cases in which the police decide not to investigate the case. Section 159 empowers a magistrate to whom first information is submitted under section 157 to make a  preliminary investigation. Section 156 (3) empowers the magistrate to order investigation independently of police. Magistrate has an important role to play in the process of arrest of the accused. Section 44 of the act provides for the arrest of a person who has committed offence in the presence of the magistrate or is suspected of having committed an offence. Also where a person is charged with the commission of non-cognizable offence, police cannot arrest him without the issue of the warrant by the magistrate. Section 204 of the code empowers the magistrate to issue summon and warrant for the arrest of the person. Magistrate has the power to take cognizance of any case that comes to him under section 190 of the code. The power to discharge the accused if no sufficient evidence against him can be found, lies in the domain of power of the Magistrate. Likewise framing of the charges if the judge has an opinion on the basis of materials and documents placed before him is one of the important functions of the court under section 228 of the code. Section 229 confers upon the judge a discretionary power to convict the accused if the accused pleads guilty before the court. In relation to the enquiry, trial or any proceedings under the code, section 311 of the code envisages on the court the power to summon any person as a witness and to examine any person in attendance or recall or re-examine any person already examined. The purpose of this section is to ensure that the true cases should not go unpunished for want of the material evidence and innocent person should not be punished for their failure to bring relative and material evide nce on record at an earlier stage of the proceedings. Section 319 enlisted in chapter XXIV of the code enables the court to “proceed against any  person not shown or mentioned as accused but if it appears from the evidence that such persons has committed such offence for which he could be tried along with the main accused against whom the trial is being held. ” This power of the court to summon a person can be exercised at any stage of the enquiry. 18 The code contains provisions for trial and punishment of offences. Chapter XXIV contains the  powers to deal with these offences. Section 344 provides for a summary procedure for trial for giving false evidences. Section 348 empowers the court to discharge the offender on tendering of apology whereas S-349 enables the court to impose punishment for refusing to answer court’s questions. Court has power to weigh the side of both accused and the prosecution and come to a right decision. A court not only punishes those who violate the law but also take care of the interest of the society along with the police and the public prosecutors. Cr.P.C envisages several important  power of the Court and in the long run of justice and peace, makes the Judge a beacon- holder for the protection of individual’s interest. POWER OF COURT Section 482 given in chapter XXXVII of the code lays down the inherent powers of the High Court where the High Court can quash the proceedings “either to prevent the abuse of process of any court or to secure the ends of the Justice”. In the case of  State of H aryana v Bhajan Lal ,  the Supreme Court laid down seven conditions, falling to which an FIR can be quashed by the High Court. First of the conditions read that if the allegations in the FIR of the case do not prima facie make out a case against the accused, the high court has the power to quash that FIR. Secondly, the allegation and the FIR must disclose a cognizable offence by the virtue of Section 156(1), if in case it doesn’t,  proceedings can be brought to an end. Thirdly, the evidence collected must exhibit the support to the allegations made and complaint filed. Fourthly, if the nature of allegation is non-cognizable and an investigation is carried out by the police officer without the prior order of the magistrate, it is likely to be quashed. Fifthly, the allegations made in the FIR must be of serious nature and absurd and inherently improbable allegations on the basis of which a prudent person can never reach a conclusion will be discarded. Sixthly, if there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provision of the code or the concerned act to the institution to provide efficacious redress for the grievance of the accused, the order would be quashed by the court. Lastly, if the criminal proceedings are conducted with a malafide or if the proceeding is instituted with an ulterior motive under private and  personal grudge, court normally would quash such order. Section 482 does not envisage any additional power to the High Court. The exercise of power under section 482 of the code is only an 19 exception and not a rule. In Didigam Bikshapathi v. State of Andhra Pradesh, the Supreme Court held that Section 482 of Cr.P.C does not confer any new power on the High Court rather this section is meant only to safeguard the existing powers of the High court to establish the rule of law and procure justice to the people.. It only saves the inherent power which the Court  possessed before the enactment of the Code. It envisages three circumstances under which the inherent jurisdiction ma y be exercised, namely, (i) to give effect to an order under the Code; (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of Court; (iii) to otherwise secure the ends of justice. It is neither possible nor desirable to lay down any inflexible rule which would govern the exercise of inherent jurisdiction. No legislative enactment dealing with procedure can provide for all cases that may possibly arise. Courts, therefore, have inherent powers apart from express  provisions of law which are necessary for proper discharge of functions and du ties imposed upon them by law. That is the doctrine which finds expression in the section which merely recognizes and preserves inherent powers of the High Courts. The limitation lies to the use of this section for in the case of S.M Seshagiri V State of A ndhra Pradesh , the Supreme Court held that the High court should be very slow and careful in its interference with the investigation or  prosecution by virtue of this section. Only when the High court would be satisfied that the complaint does not disclose commission of any offence or prosecution is barred by limitation or that the proceedings of criminal case would result in failure of justice, then it may exercise its inherent power under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Though this inherent power is vested only in the st th High Court, the 141  report of the 12  Law Commission recommended for conferment of the inherent powers on the subordinate courts also other than High Court. In case an accused feels aggrieved with the way police is investigating the case, he does not have an option to approach the magistrate since under section 156(1), a magistrate cannot interfere or take over the investigation or entrust it to any subordinate magistrate. All that the aggrieved  person can do is to move to High Court and invoke Article 226 of the constitution. In the case of non-application of Section 482, Article 226/227 of the constitution can be invoked because 20 nothing in the code can curtail the constitutional power of the High Court if the conditions for the exercise of extraordinary power are present. Article 226 provides for the writ jurisdiction to the High Court which entails a procedure to obtain speedy and effective redress against an illegal exercise of power by the Executive. Through writs, High Court comes in a position to control to an extent the administrative authorities of the society. In order to invoke Article 226, it is essential to convince the High Court that the power of investigation has been exercised by a  police officer malafide, in such cases the High Court can always issue a writ of mandamus restraining the police officer from misusing his legal power. POWER OF POLICE Police is the anchor of the criminal system in India. Police ensures protection of people and their  property and work to maintain peace in the society. Primarily the police have twofold roles to  play- the investigation of the crime and the crime prevention. In criminal justice system, police is the principal agency for carrying out investigations. When an offence committed is brought to the notice of the police, it is their responsibility to investigate into the matter to find out who has committed the offence, ascertain the facts and circumstances relevant to the crime and to collect the evidence, oral or circumstantial that is necessary to prove the case in the court. The success or failure of the case depends entirely on the work of the investigating officer. The police have got wide powers of investigation under Section 156 and Section 157 of the act. Section 156 confers on the police the power to investigate the commission of any cognizable offences. This section empowers the police officer in charge of the police station to investigate only cognizable offences which a court having jurisdiction over the  particular local area may inquire into and try. This section places the statutory right on the police to carry out investigation of the circumstances of the alleged crime without requiring any authority from the judicial authorities and neither can a magistrate nor a High court can interfere with those rights by an exercise of inherent jurisdiction of the court. The power of the police to investigate exists even without such information of cognizable offence if the police have the reason to suspect the commission of a cognizable offence by virtue of Section 157. Section 157 of the code requires of the police officer to immediately commence 21 investigation when he has reason to suspect the commission of a cognizable offence within the  jurisdiction of his police station. It is of utmost importance that the police must be prompt in the investigation of the cognizable offence as delay therein is likely to cause serious prejudice either to the accused or to the prosecution. Police carry out investigation by virtue of Section 156(3) as well where they receive the order from magistrate empowered to take offence under Section 190. 8. MALIMATH COMMITTEE REPORT Malimath committee was constituted by the Ministry of Home affairs of the Government of India in November 2000 for suggesting the reforms in the criminal law system of the country headed under former member of National Human Rights Commission, Justice V.S Malimath. The report was published in 2003 and it suggested various radical reforms with respect to the Police, Prosecution and Judiciary of India. The report was divided into two volumes and it contained a total of 158 recommendations for reforming the criminal justice system. The committee led out a comprehensive research of the criminal justice system, fundamental  principles of criminal laws such as rights of the accused, presumption of innocence, burden of  proof and justice to victims and proposed far reaching changes in the context of investigation,  prosecution, and judiciary and the crime and punishment. The report was critical of the adversarial system of justice on account of the lack of faith of the people in this model of criminal justice. The committee pointed out that the judge in order to show himself neutral  becomes passive and truth becomes a mere “casualty”. There can be instances of failure of the investigating agency to find out truth on account of “errors or omission, faulty attitude of the  parties, lack of witnesses or inadequacies in the principles and laws regulating the system.” Since no provision exists in the code to oblige the court to find out the truth, the general presumption is that falsehood generally succeeds in courts. Malimath committee report appreciated the inquisitorial system of justice on account that in this model an effective role of magistrate comes into the picture. Under inquisitorial system, a magistrate seeks to conduct a fair trial; he examines all the evidences and the witnesses and tries to protect the accused from “arbitrariness”. The Malimath committee recommended the same on 22 the line that: “The shift to an inquisitorial system carries with it an increase in the competences and powers of the court, which has the duty to order further investigations on its own motion if it is not  satisfied with the result of the investigations. The I ndian law-maker must be aware of the implications of such a shift towards a court-controlled system, and build into a new system the safeguards necessary to such a system.” 9. CONCLUSION It can be concluded from the above discussion that “Justice delayed is Justice denied” so the  justice giving system should be more strong and the speed of trail should be increased by  bringing certain changes in the criminal justice system. Also there is a need to clear the backlog of pending cases. Still, the untiring efforts put by fear and flavorless Indian Judiciary is doing commendable job of imparting justice in spite of so many difficulties, which created faith of  public. Criminal Code of Procedure contains the procedures to seek substantive criminal law in India with regards to the offences like bailable and non-bailable offences, cognizable and non cognizable offences and offences on warrant case and summon case. It includes the various interlinked powers and functions of Police, Magistrates and Judges. The criminal trial process has to undergo through the active prism of Police and Judiciary. Police and courts complement the functions of each other. They are the two sides of the same coin whose ultimate aim is to deliver justice to the parties. Police tries out the best to garner evidences against the person accused of the offence and the court determines whether that evidence is reliable enough to base the decision on or not. Public Prosecutor is the officer of court and his role in putting up the case of the prosecution can in no way be undermined. Further, in an adversarial system of Justice which India follows, the role of the Police, Prosecutor and the defence is dominant. The recommendations of the Malimath committee if implemented would increase the participation of the court in the investigation and trial process though the recommendations have not yet been implemented fully. Also, a thorough research is required to be done before the application of the inquisitorial system in India with regards to the implication of giving in hands of the judges, such supreme power to decide a case as is given in the Inquisitorial Justice System. 23 24