Siva Vs. State, Inspector of Police

Siva vs State, Inspector of Police

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jun 23, 2000

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/822607

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/822607
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: B. Akbar Basha Khadiri, J.
Decided On: Jun 23, 2000
Case Number: Cri. R.C. No. 1227 of 1999, Cri. R.P. No. 1227 of 1999 and Cri. M.P. No. 9486 of 1999
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- SECURITISATION & RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS & ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 [C.A. No. 54/2002]Section 17; Power of Tribunal to impose condition relating to deposit for grant of stay of auction Held, There is no specific provision made under Section 17 of Securitisation Act or under any other ...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 145 and 161; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 172, 172(1) and 172(2)

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Siva

Advocate T.K. Gopalan, Adv. ;for M.V. Venkataseshan, Adv.

Respondent

State, Inspector of Police

Advocate M. Saravanan, Govt. Pleader

Legal References

Acts: Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 145 and 161; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 172, 172(1) and 172(2)
Reported In: 2000CriLJ4465

Excerpt

.....that the legislature intended that there would be automatic stay of recovery proceedings by bank under section 13(4) on filing an appeal by borrower under section 17. use of the expressions if and then under section 17 would not mean that the bank can take one or more measures laid down under section 13(4) only if the tribunal declares that the action taken already is in accordance with the provisions of the securitisation act and the rules made thereunder. use of the word if does not connote a condition precedent. it is a recognised rule of interpretation of statutes that expressions used therein should ordinarily be understood in a sense in which they harmonized with the object of the statute and which effectuate the object of the legislature. the provisions of section 17 must, therefore, receive such construction at the hands of the court as would advance the object and at any event not thwart it. in other words, the principle of purposive interpretation should be applied while construing the said provisions. the securitisation act is enacted to provide a speedy and summary remedy for recovery of thousands of crores which were due to the banks and financial institutions. .....to see them merely because they are referred to by the court; but, if they are used by the police officer who made them to refresh his memory, or if the court uses them for the purposes of contradicting such police officer, the provisions of section 161 or section 145, as the case may be, of the indian evidence act, 1872 (1 of 1872) shall apply.3. the police officers are required to maintain two diaries, viz., (i) a diary where entries are made about the events which take place in the police station in chronological order and it is ordinarily difficult to fabricate false entries in such diary and this diary has to be maintained day by day. this diary is known as general diary, (ii) apart from general diary, the police officer who happens to be the investigating officer has to maintain a case diary. the case diary should set forth the proceedings day by day of the investigating officer and must record inter alia the time at which the information reached him, the time at which he began and closed his investigation, the place or places visited by him and circumstances ascertained through his investigation.4. what is referred to under section 172(1), cr.p.c. is the case diary. it has two parts, viz., (i) relating to the steps taken during investigation by the police officer with particular reference to the time at which the police received the information, the time at which the police officer began and closed investigation, the place and places visited by him; and (ii) a statement of circumstances ascertained through his investigation.5. the police diary mentioned in sub-section (2) to section 172, cr.p.c. refers to the diary of the first category mentioned above. the entries in the diary prepared under section 172 are only notes of secondary evidence of witnesses who can be examined in the first instance and whose evidence, if necessary, should be recorded in the open court in the presence of the accused, therefore, they do not assume the character of either.....

Full Judgment

ORDER

B. Akbar Basha Khadiri, J.

1. The only question that arises in this proceeding is whether the general diary maintained by the Police Control Room is a document falling within the purview of Section 172, Cr.P.C.

2. Heard both the sides. Section 172 of the Code of Criminal Procedure recites as under :

172. Diary of proceedings in investigation.

(1) Every police officer making an investigation under this Chapter shall day by day enter his proceedings in the investigation in a diary, setting forth the time at which the information reached him, the time at which he began and closed his investigation, the place or places visited by him, and a statement of the circumstances ascertained through his investigation.

(2) Any Criminal Court may send for the police diaries of a case under inquiry or trial in such Court, and may use such diaries, not as evidence in the case, but to aid it in such inquiry or trial.

(3) Neither the accused nor his agents shall be entitled to call for such diaries, nor shall he or they be entitled to see them merely because they are referred to by the Court; but, if they are used by the Police Officer who made them to refresh his memory, or if the Court uses them for the purposes of contradicting such police officer, the provisions of Section 161 or Section 145, as the case may be, of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872) shall apply.

3. The Police Officers are required to maintain two diaries, viz., (i) A diary where entries are made about the events which take place in the Police Station in Chronological order and it is ordinarily difficult to fabricate false entries in such diary and this diary has to be maintained day by day. This diary is known as general diary, (ii) Apart from general diary, the Police Officer who happens to be the investigating officer has to maintain a case diary. The case diary should set forth the proceedings day by day of the investigating officer and must record inter alia the time at which the information reached him, the time at which he began and closed his investigation, the place or places visited by him and circumstances ascertained through his investigation.

4. What is referred to under Section 172(1), Cr.P.C. is the case diary. It has two parts, viz., (i) relating to the steps taken during investigation by the Police Officer with particular reference to the time at which the Police received the information, the time at which the Police Officer began and closed investigation, the place and places visited by him; and (ii) a statement of circumstances ascertained through his investigation.

5. The Police Diary mentioned in Sub-section (2) to Section 172, Cr.P.C. refers to the diary of the first category mentioned above. The entries in the diary prepared under Section 172 are only notes of secondary evidence of witnesses who can be examined in the first instance and whose evidence, if necessary, should be recorded in the open Court in the presence of the accused, therefore, they do not assume the character of either the substantive evidence or the corroborative evidence. It therefore follows that neither the accused nor his agent is entitled to see the diary, though the Court may call for the diary and refer to it.

6. What has now been sought for by the petitioner is the copies of the entries in the general diary maintained by the Police Control Room and not the case diary maintained by the investigating officer or the general diary maintained by the concerned police. The Officials of the Police Control Room cannot be termed as investigating officers. I feel, the diary maintained by the Police Control Room may not assume the character of a police diary adumbrated under Section 172, Cr.P.C. The findings of the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Madurai that a diary maintained in the Police Control Room also comes within the purview of Section 172(2), Cr.P.C. appears to be erroneous. The orders passed by the learned Sessions Judge is set aside. The learned II Additional Sessions Judge is directed to furnish a copy of pages 9, 10, 17 and 18 of the Diary dated 8-8-1997, maintained by the Madurai City Police Control Room to the petitioners. This Criminal revision is ordered accordingly. Consequently, connected Crl. M. P. is closed.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2000 Same Parties Siva vs State, Inspector of Police Same Subject Criminal Same Judge B. Akbar Basha Khadiri, J. Acts & Sections Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 145 and 161; Code of Criminal P...

Criminal