Final Report Not Substantive Piece Of Evidence But A Collective Opinion Of Investigating Officer

Case: Rajesh Yadav vs State of UP

Coram: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh

Case No.: CrA 339-340 OF 2014

Court Observation: “Section 173(2) of the CrPC calls upon the investigating officer to file his final report before the court. It being a report, is nothing but a piece of evidence. It forms a mere opinion of the investigating officer on the materials collected by him. He takes note of the offence and thereafter, conducts an investigation to identify the offender, the truth of which can only be decided by the court. The aforesaid conclusion would lead to the position that the evidence of the investigating officer is not indispensable. The evidence is required for corroboration and contradiction of the other material witnesses as he is the one who links and presents them before the court. Even assuming that the investigating officer has not deposed before the court or has not cooperated sufficiently, an accused is not entitled for acquittal solely on that basis, when 16 there are other incriminating evidence available on record.”

“It is very unfortunate that the investigating officer could not be produced despite the best efforts made. The reason is obvious. There are three investigating officers. The other two investigating officers have been examined including for the charge under the Arms Act. PW-13, the first investigating officer, has been examined in extenso during cross examination. It is only for the further examination he turned turtle. That per se would not make the entire case of the prosecution bad is law particularly when the final report itself cannot be termed as a substantive piece of evidence being nothing but a collective opinion of the investigating officer.”

Previous Posts

Girl Child In A Very Vulnerable Position In Our Country; No Leniency For POCSO Convict: Supreme Court

Section 498A IPC – Prosecution Of Husband’s Relatives Based On General & Omnibus Allegations By Wife Is Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court

Post Office/Bank Can Be Held Liable For Frauds Or Wrongs Committed by its Employees: Supreme Court

International Conference on Energy Trilemma: Emerging Laws, Trending Solutions and Exploring the Way Forward

Wakf Board Can Declare A Property As Wakf Only After Conducting Inquiry Under Section 40 Wakf Act: Supreme Court

Dismissal Of An Earlier Section 482 CrPC Petition Does Not Bar Filing Of Subsequent Petition If Facts So Justify: Supreme Court Download Judgement