Roll No.

64
SAP ID: 500076620
UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM AND ENERGY STUDIES
Mid Semester Examination, October 2020
Open Book – Through Blackboard Learning Management System

Course: Law of Crimes II : Code of Criminal Procedure I Course Code: CLCC2003

Programme: BA.LL.B CNTL/CRL Semester:III

Time: 02 hrs. Max. Marks: 50

Instructions:
As this examination is in open-book format, the students are expected to demonstrate a very high degree of Academic Integrity
and not copy contents from resources referred. Instructors would look for understanding of the concept by the students and any
similarity found from resources online/ offline shall be penalized in terms of deduction of marks and even cancellation of paper
in requisite cases. The online examination committee of the School would also look for similarity of two answer scripts and if
answer scripts of two or more students are found similar, both the answer scripts shall be treated as copied and lead to
cancellation of the paper. In view of the aforesaid points, the students are warned that they should desist from using any unfair means.

Instructions:

S. No. Marks CO
1 Analyse the issues involved and decision given by SC in Lalita Kumari v. State of UP.
10 CO2
Ans.

2 A is arrested without a warrant. How long can he be kept in police custody without being
produced before a magistrate? What is the procedure for getting his detention extended? 10 CO1

Ans.
3 Fair trial is essence of rule of law. Even if the prima facie evidence or case can be
established against the accused then also numerous rights have been given to the
10 CO1
accused, which may violate the basic rights of victim. Critically analyse the principle
of fair trial in the light of above statement.
Ans.
4 Elaborate the guidelines issued by the SC in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar 10 CO2
Ans.
5 Differentiate between:
Cognizable and non- cognizable offences 10 CO1
Investigation, Inquiry and Trial
Ans.
I, ………………Nainshree Joshi……………………………., understand that
submitting work that isn’t my own may result in failure in this paper and I may
also be subject to Disciplinary Proceedings as per the Academic Integrity
policy of the University.

A1) Lalita Kumari vs State of UP:-

The FACTS of the above case prima facie were:-
 A Writ Petition was once filed in the Supreme Court under Article 32 via Lalita
Kumari (minor) via her father.
 The important criticism mentioned in the Petition used to be that in 2008, the
father submitted a written lacking man or woman document at the police
station in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh after failed tries of tracing his daughter.
 The police officer refused to register the FIR beneath Section 154 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure.
 Thereafter, the father approached the Superintendent of Police, and on his
directions, the FIR registered.

Discretion of the Court:-

 The Supreme Court, in the case of Lalita Kumari v. Govt of U.P. and Ors.
acknowledged that the regulation surrounding compulsory registration of FIR
used to be uncertain due to conflicting judgements surpassed by using the
Courts.
 This uncertainty led to a referral to the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme
Court in the case of Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh.

Issues concerned in the existing case:-

 There were round 4 primary problems which have been arised upon the
court:-1. Whether the Provision must be read purposively, in light of the
purpose and instances at the back of the enactment of the Provision, whilst
balancing the rights of the accused as nicely as the victims?

2. Whether the phrases of the Provision must be construed actually to mean

the registration of an FIR is mandatory upon the disclosure of a cognizable
offence?

3. Whether the word ‘shall’ appearing in the Provision should be interpreted

as obligatory or discretionary?

4. Whether the use of the phrase ‘information’ within the Provision meant that
the FIR could only be registered after the police officer is comfortable with the
credibility or reasonableness of the records disclosing the cognizable offence.
  To resolve the above issues the court decided in accordance to the policies
of:-
Literal Construction
 Under the literal rule of construction, if the phrases of the statute are clear and
unambiguous and, decoding the words in their regular meaning does not
create an absurdity or inconsistency; the Court is required to practice the
literal rule development to carry the intent of the Legislator.
 In contrast to the literal rule, purposive interpretation considers various
different elements such as the motive for which the provision was once
enacted, thereby allowing the judges to go beyond the textual content of the
statute.
 The Court similarly relies on statutory stare decisis as a precept rule of
interpretation.
 Under this, the Courts are free to remember on in the past decisions that
establish the procedural rules, requirements and the typical operation of a
provision.
 This utility similarly raises a super-strong presumption that previous decisions
pertaining to the Provision are correct and have to no longer be overturned.

Interpretation of the phrase ‘shall.’

 The Court relies on subsidiary regulations as guiding concepts to interpret the
word ‘shall’ appearing within the Provision.
 The use of the phrase ‘shall’ is no longer continually indicative of the absence
of discretion as supported with the aid of judicial precedents, nor can a
definitive meaning be given to the phrase ‘shall’ which will then follow in all
cases.
 By putting reliance on how the Courts have previously interpreted the phrase
‘shall’, the use of precedents as exterior resource in statutory interpretation
leads to consistency and uniformity in the technique of interpretation.

Interpretation of the phrase ‘Information.’

 To interpret ‘information’ appearing within the Provision, there is a
presumption that the deliberate omission on the section of the Legislature is
not a mistake and that the legislator supposed to say what has been noted in
the statute.
 Further, there is an utility of the precept of casus omissus.
 Under this, the Court is no longer able to supply an omission for that will
constituent as law-making. The major focal point of the Courts is jus dicere
non facere that is to declare or decide the regulation
A2) ARREST AND ITS PROCEDURE:-
What exactly is the meaning or Arrest?
In simple words, it means “to keep a person in lawful custody”
 A person can be arrested through the police with a warrant or barring a
warrant.
 Chapter V of the CrPC deals with ARREST.
 The term arrest can be described as “a seizure or forcible restraint in order to
deprive a individual his strength of liberty”.
 Arrest is exceptional from custody.
 Usually, in cognizable offences arrest can be made barring a warrant and in
non- cognizable offences arrest can't be made without a warrant.
 But this is no longer a essential circumstance
 Section 41 of the CrPC enumerates the categories of instances in which a
police officer may arrest a individual except an order from a Magistrate and
besides a warrant.
 Under section 42 of the code the police also have the power to arrest a man
or woman if he denies giving his correct title and residential address or the
police have a cause to consider that the information provided via him is
wrong.
 According to part 56 and 57 of CrPC, a person when arrested except warrant
has to be earlier than the magistrate inside 24 hours of the arrest.
 The Constitution of India, Article 22(2) additionally offers for producing the
arrested character earlier than Magistrate inside 24 hours. No person can be
detained for greater than 24 hours.
 Such time period can be prolonged through the magistrate. This is dealt in
section 167 of the CrPC.
 When any investigation can't be carried out in 24 hours and the accusation is
properly founded, the police officer is required to send a replica of the entries
in the diary bearing on to the case along with the accused to the nearest
Magistrate.
 The object of requiring the accused to be produced earlier than a Magistrate
for purposes of remand is to enable the Magistrate to see that the remand is
necessary.
 When a person is arrested and produced before a Magistrate, the Magistrate
can remand him to police or judicial custody for 15 days at the first instance.
 Within this period of 15 days, there can be more than one order altering the
nature of such custody both from police to judicial or vice-versa.
 After the expiry of the first duration of 15 days, the in addition remand can
only be in judicial custody.
 There can't be any detention in police custody after the expiry of first 15 days.
 The magistrate can authorize detention after 15 days only if he is cozy that
enough grounds exist.
 The judicial custody have to additionally now not exceed ninety days the place
investigation associated to an offence punishable with death, life
imprisonment, or 10 years imprisonment and detention not exceed 60 days in
case of other offences.
 If the investigation is now not done within ninety or 60 days, then he has to be
released on bail beneath the proviso to section 167(2).
A3) FAIR TRIAL:-
 Fair trial is a necessary part of Article 21 of the Constitution and rests on the
basic precept of presumption of innocence.
 International gadgets such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, European Convention on
Human Rights and Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms have been
referred to in order to enumerate the concepts of the thought and the rights of
the accused.
 Additionally, an accused also has quite a few pre trial and publish trial rights
as properly that are guaranteed to the accused in the CrPC.
 Thus, in a democratic society even the rights of the accused are sacrosanct,
though accused of an offence, he does now not end up a non-person.
 In the main case of Kishore Singh Ravinder Dev v. State of Rajasthan, it
used to be stated that the legal guidelines of India i.e. Constitutional,
Evidentiary and procedural have made problematic provisions for
safeguarding the rights of accused with the view to defend his (accused)
dignity as a human being and giving him advantages of a just, truthful and
impartial trail.
 Pre-trial rights consist of the proper to have knowledge related to what one
has been accused of, proper to a lawyer, possibility to shield oneself.
 The standards of double jeopardy and the right in opposition to self
incrimination have additionally been examined in the light of current case legal
guidelines such as Selvi v State of Karnataka, where the Court concluded
that a Narco evaluation test violates this right.
 Hussainara Khatoon v State of Bihar, (where it used to be held that a
speedy trial is an vital ingredient of fair trial system and it is the constitutional
responsibility of the State to set up a process that would ensure the same)
and Ranjan Dwivedi v CBI.
 Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Zahira Habibullah Sheikh
 International establishments such as the Universal Declaration of human
rights UDHR 1948, worldwide covenant on civil and political rights, and
freedoms have been referred to in order to enumerate the concepts of the
thought and the rights of the accused.
 An accused has quite a few pre trials and post trials rights as well that
assured to the accused in the CRPC.
 1. Pre trial rights are the rights to have understanding involving what one has
been accused of, proper to a lawyer, and probability to protect himself.
 A case associated to have pre trial rights is:
 Khatri v. state of bihar the place it was once held that an accused is entitled
to have free legal services.
 2. Post trial rights including the right to lawful punishment, ideal execution of a
sentence, proper to file appeal and that to humane treatment have additionally
been analysed.
  The proper to a truthful path has been described in severa global instruments.
The most important points of truthful trial are preserved in Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.
 As a long way as Indian felony device is concerned, the global promise of
truthful trial is very an awful lot mirrored in its constitutional scheme as
properly as its procedural law.It is designed to guard people from the illegal
and arbitrary curtailment or deprivation of their basic rights and freedoms, the
most distinguished of which are the right to existence and liberty.
 The thought of fair trial is primarily based on the standards of natural justice.
The notion of honest trial is based on the basic ideology of the kingdom to
have the duty to bring the offenders before the law.
 In the war in opposition to crime and delinquency country and its officers
cannot on any account forsake the decency of the kingdom behaviour for the
sake of crime and even criminals.
 Therefore the manner adopted by the state ought to be just, honest and
reasonable.
A4)
Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar:-
 A spouse made a grievance in opposition to her mother in law and father in
law that they were harassing her by asking her for dowry in the structure of
Maruti Car, 8 lakhs rupees, TV etc.
 When the spouse told the husband the husband also supported his dad and
mom and threatened the wife that he will remarry.
 It had been alleged that the wife was once forced out of her matrimonial home
due to the fact she failed to produce the requested dowry.
 FIR used to be filed.
 The husband went for an software for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of
Criminal Procedure Act, which is a course to launch a individual on bail,
issued even before the individual is arrested. But the same was once rejected
with the aid of the Sessions Judge and then the High Court.
 The husband used to be charged underneath Section 498-A of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 which is and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
 The most sentence below 498-A of IPC is imprisonment up to 3 years and
fines and the most sentence below part 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is 2
years with fines.
 In Section 41 of Criminal Procedure Act which state the provisions for when
police can arrest without warrant it is mentioned that police can arrest a
individual who is involved in any cognizable offence, or towards whom a
lifelike criticism has been made, or credible records has been received, or a
practical suspicion exists, of his having been so concerned.

DIRECTIONS ORDERED BY THE COURT

  State governments were authorized to arrest a character immediately on the
basis that the offence is cognizable and non-bailable or any other case under
498-A.
 A thorough investigation be carried out and fulfil the grounds point out section
forty one of CrPc.
 A checklist have to be provided to all police officers containing all the sub
clauses of section 41 of CrPc.
 The checklist need to be true filed with the aid of the officer and be forwarded
with ideal motives for the arrest and produced when earlier than the
Magistrate when required.
 The Magistrate need to be satisfied with prerequisites cited Section 41 CrPc
for arrest and solely thereafter that he will authorize the detention of an
accused.
 If there is decision to no longer arrest someone it should be forwarded to the
Magistrate inside the length of 2 weeks from the date of initiation of the case
which can also be extended through the Superintendent of the Police Station
and motives why the arrest did no longer take place.
 If police officers do now not observe the orders the worried officers will be in
charge for departmental action. They shall also be responsible for contempt of
courtroom of the High Court in the worried jurisdiction.
 This will now not solely follow to Section 498-A of the IPC or Section four of
the Dowry Prohibition Act, this judgement will follow to all troubles where
offence is punishable with imprisonment for a period which may be much less
than seven years or which may lengthen to seven years; whether or not with
or barring a fine.
A5) (a)

OFFENCE:-

 Under Criminal Procedure Code under section 2 (n) which states that
any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in
force and includes any act in respect of which a complaint may be made
under section 20 of the Cattle-trespass Act, 1871.
 In simple words, it is an act which is considered evil.

COGNIZABLE NON
OFFENCE COGNIZABLE
OFFENCE
It includes all Trivial-ness is
serious offence. more and less
serious than
cognizable
offence.
Offence or evil act Those which are
under laws other punishable with
than Indian Penal less than 3 years
Code which are or with fine.
punishable with 3
years
imprisonment or
more.
A cognizable A non-cognizable
offence is a offence is an
criminal offence in offence in which
which the police is police can neither
empowered to register FIR,
register an FIR, investigate, nor
investigate, and effect arrest
arrest an accused without warrant.
without a court
issued warrant.
They are They are
considered public considered
wrongs. private wrongs.
Prosecution of Prosecution of
offender is left to offender is left to
imitative and initiative and
efforts of the efforts of private
state. citizens.
Cognizable case Non cognizable
is non- bailable in case is bailable in
nature. nature.
 (B) Differences between Inquiry, investigation and trial:-
 The word “Investigation” is defined under Section 2(h) of CrPC.
Investigation includes all the proceedings under this Code for the
collection of evidence constructed by a police officer or by any person
(other than a Magistrate) who is authorized by a Magistrate in this
behalf.
 The word “Inquiry” is defined under section 2(g) of the CrPC. “Inquiry”
means every inquiry, other than a trial, conducted under this Code by a
Magistrate or Court.
 The word “Trial” has not been defined in CrPC. It basically means the
examination of facts and law presided by a judge with the authority to
hear the matter.
Other differences:-

INQUIRY INVESTIGATION TRIAL

AUTHORITY OF Authority is with Authority is with Authority is with
CONDUCTMENT Magistrate or the police officer or any Judge or a
Court. other person who is Magistrate.
authorized by a
magistrate.
COMMENCEMENT It starts when In this,
Commencement
complaint is filed commencement takes place either
to the Magistrate. takes place when by framing of
FIR is lodged or charge or
when a complaint is arrangement of
made to Magistrate. the accused.
AS TO MEANING Any proceedings Proceedings The Judicial
conducted by conducted by police proceedings
magistrate or a officer. conducted by the
court. Court.
RESULT It finishes only In this, it finishes The result is
with the with the result but Punishment or
recommendation with the opinion of acquittal.
s which plays a police officer which
vital role. is to be submitted
before the court.
PUROPOSE The main The main purpose The main
purpose is here is collection of purpose here is
determination of evidence for reading finalization of
the truth. near the truth. truth and falsity.
PROCEEDINGS By Magistrate By Police Officer Judicial
proceedings
FRAMING OF This takes No charge is framed It basically starts
CHARGE placed, or charge during investigation. after framing of
is framed during charge.
inquiry.
REMEDY Appeal or Remedy here is : Transfer of
revision against Second inquiry order investigation
 decision is the order is the
remedy here remedy here
PROCESS It is the last It may be 1st and 2nd It is the 1st
process. process. process.