Courts should not focus only on flaws in probe -- SC

Courts should not focus only on flaws in probe -- SC
PRESS TRUST OF INDIA

New Delhi, Aug 29: In a judgement favouring investigating agencies, the Supreme Court today ruled that trial courts should not waste their time picking lapses in probes but make an effort to salvage the criminal justice system despite such defects in investigation.

"If offenders are acquitted only on account of flaws or defects in investigation, the cause of criminal justice becomes a victim," a division Bench comprising Justice K T Thomas and Justice R P Sethi said.

The ruling came in a case in which a young businessman was abducted in public view and few hours later his dead body was found.

The trial court convicted the accused on charges of abduction but not for murder saying there was no evidence to show that the victim was in custody of the accused after abduction and that they had murdered him.

The Calcutta High Court had upheld the trial court order while shortening the sentence of the convicts. It had severely criticised the investigating agency for flaws committed in the probe.

Justice K T Thomas, while allowing the appeal of West Bengal Government against the High Court order, said "castigation of investigation unfortunately seems to be a regular practice when the trial courts acquit accused in criminal cases."

Convicting the accused of murder, the Supreme Court ordered life sentence to all and directed the police to put them back in jail.

The court said it was almost impossible to come across a single case where the investigations conducted by the police or other authorities were flawless or foolproof.

"The function of the criminal courts should not be wasted in picking out the lapses in investigation and by expressing unsavoury criticism against investigating officers," Justice Thomas said writing the judgement for the Bench.

In the present case the blood stained shirt of the victim was found from the premises of the accused on the basis of his statment made during the interrogation. But still the trial court and the High Court did not link it to the murder.

Justice Thomas said "if the offenders are acquitted only on account of flaws or defects in investigation, the cause of criminal justice becomes the victim."

"Efforts should be made by courts to see that criminal justice is salvaged despite such defects in the investigation," he said.

The trial courts, while taking note of the flaws in investigation, should bear in mind the constraints with which the investigating agencies have to work with and the kind of equipment they posses for probing a case.

"Courts should bear in mind the time constraints of the police officers in the present system, the ill-equipped machinery they have to cope with, and the traditional apathy of respectable persons to come forward for giving evidence," it said.

Justice Thomas said these are the realities a police officer confronts everyday and advised the trial courts to apply their minds to these circumstances before castigating the investigating agency.

"Before an investigating officer is imputed with castigating remarks the courts should not only overlook the fact that usually such an officer is not heard in respect of such remarks made against them," Justice Thomas said.

The Apex Court Bench said in its view the trial courts need make such deprecatory remarks only when it was absolutely necessary in a particular case, and that too by keeping in mind the broad realities.

Referring to the abduction case, the Bench said it had not come across any such serious flaw in the investigation which had affected the case or which would have impaired the core of the prosecution case justifying remarks against the investigating officers.

Allowing the appeal and dismissing the appeals filed by the accused, the Bench said in addition to the conviction of them on charges of abduction, they would also be convicted for murdering the businessman.

"We direct the sessions Judge, Calcutta City, to take immediate steps for putting the convicted persons back in jail for undergoing the remaining portions of the sentences imposed by this judgement," the Bench said.