ROLE OF MAGISTRATE IN

INVESTIGATION
PRESENTED BY-
PRAGATI CHATURVEDI
CONTENT
 INTRODUCTION TO INVESTIGATION
 SCOPE OF SECTION 156(3)&202 OF THE Cr.P.C.
 STAGES WHERE MAGESTRIAL VIGILANCE NEEDED
 CONCLUSION
INTRODUCTION TO INVESTIGATION
 The term “Investigation” has been defined in section 2(h) of the
criminal procedure code as “collection of evidence conducted by the
Police Officer or by any person other than a Magistrate who is
authorized by a Magistrate in this behalf”. 
 Who can Conduct Investigation?
 The Investigation can be conducted either by a police officer or
another authorized person other than a Magistrate. No oath should
be administered to the persons examined or interrogated during
Investigation.
 Investigation normally consist of the following:
• Proceeding to the spot of the event;
• Ascertainment of the facts and circumstances of the case;
• Discovery and arrest of the suspected offender;
• Collection of the evidence relating to the commission of the offence which may consist
of:
• An examination of various persons including the accused and recording their
statements if the investigating officer thinks it is necessary.
• The search of places, seizure of things considered necessary for the investigation and
to be produced at the time of trial.
• Formation of opinion as to whether it is a fit case for the accused to be sent up for the
trial and if so, taking steps to file a charge sheet.
• Summoning and examining the persons who are acquainted with the circumstances of
the case.
• Preparation of site plan of occurrence.
• Arresting the suspected offender.
• Ultimately submitting the charge sheet or challan under section 173 of CrPC to the
court.
SCOPE OF SECTION 156(3)&202 OF THE
Cr.P.C.
 The criminal proceedings are instituted by the registration of First Information Report
(FIR). An investigation is done post FIR. However, when no proper investigation is
conducted despite the registration of FIR, a Magistrate as per section 156(3) of the
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is empowered to order the investigation.
 Section 156(3) attempts to define powers briefly. It does not expressly and exhaustively
provides for the powers and its extent.
 The word ‘Magistrate’ mentioned in section 156(3) means Judicial Magistrate who is
empowered to take cognizance of a cognizable offence and not Executive Magistrate. A
Magistrate is empowered to order the investigation for the offence only when he is
empowered to take the cognizance of such offence under section 190 of the Code. The
power under section 156(3) of the Code can be exercised by the Magistrate even before
he takes the cognizance provided that the complaint discloses the commission of a
cognizable offence. Thus, where the complaint did not disclose commission of a
cognizable offence, the order directing investigation was held liable to be quashed.[2]
 The power conferred under section 156(3) can be invoked by the Magistrate before he
takes the cognizance of the offence. It was held in the Kanak Singh v. Balabhadra Singh,
[3] that very fact that the Magistrate passed the order for investigation under the sub-
section without examining the complainant by itself is sufficient to hold that the Magistrate
has not taken cognizance of the offence but the order was held not to be illegal and that the
High Court could not prevent the police from investigating the offence under section 482.
 The power conferred by section 156(3) is an independent power and does not limit the
power of any investigating officer.
 Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 primarily focuses on the postponing
of the issue of process on the part of the Magistrate. In other words, a Magistrate, if he
deems fit to carry out a further inquiry in a given case either by himself/herself or an
investigation by the police, may postpone the issue of process. This Code primarily has the
objective of ensuring that there is absolutely no issue or loophole in the case which might
be exploited by either of the parties, thereby ensuring fair and equitable justice. Apart from
that, there might be certain cases that might require deeper investigation than was thought
before. Due to this, to obtain some more time for investigation, the issue of process could
be postponed. The Magistrate might formally take evidence from the witnesses on oath as
per the powers assigned to them. Only after a complaint has been filed before the
Magistrate and he/she has taken cognizance of the case can this section be invoked. 
STAGES WHERE MAGESTRIAL VIGILANCE
NEEDED
STAGE-I-SOON AFTER THE REGISTRATION
OF FIR
 Criminal justice Administration is set into motion with the receipt of information with
respect to the commission of a cognizable offence . Section 157 mandates the sending
of a report to this effect to the area magistrate forthwith, to bring the matter to his
scrutiny. This is a safeguard meant to prevent police excess, embellishments, false
prosecutions and noninvestigation at a crucial stage.
 A copy of the FIR (often termed ‘occurrence report’) is to be brought to the seisin of
the magistrate as soon as possible, and any delay can adversely affect the prosecution
case at trial, if not explained adequately. In heinous cases, a copy of the FIR alongwith
an endorsement is dispatched via a special messenger to the area magistrate or duty
magistrate.
 Section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides the condition
to take cognizance of offences by magistrates. 
 According to this section, the Magistrate can take cognizance when:
1. After receiving a police complaint;
2. After receiving complaints of facts which constitutes any offence;
3. After receiving information from any person other than a police officer, or upon his own knowledge,
that such offence has been committed;
4. The Chief Judicial Magistrate can empower any Magistrate of the second class to take cognizance of
offences which are within his competence to conduct an inquiry or a trial.
 The Magistrate can scrutinize the complaint and examine it completely before issuing a process.
 SCRUTINY AND EXAMINATION OF COMPLAINT
 The examination of the complainant is an initial process that strengthens the entire proceedings. This
process adds credibility to complaints in the beginning stages. It is necessary to scrutinize the
complaint before issuing the process. Chapter XVI would come into play only after this examination is
over. The locus standi of the complainant is verified using this examination. The Magistrate will also
verify whether the complainant would come under the exceptions provided in Section 195 to Section
199. The magistrate can issue the process without postponing: when the prima facie case is made out
in the investigation. This process of scrutinizing the complainant has to be done by the Magistrate
himself and not by the advocate, however, the concerned advocate can help in the process.
 Due process of arrest should be non- arbitrary, just and reasonable and every arrest should be
made on justifiable reasons. Magistrate examined the reason for the arrest which was recorded
by the police officer. After examining the reasons for arrest, the next step is to identify whether
the grounds are available for the detention of the accused, for bail, or for discharge. Detention
of a person can have serious consequences on the constitutional level as well as at the social
level. It may affect personal liberty and freedom of citizens.
 Under Section 167 of CrPc, the magistrate can authorize detention after examining that the
arrest is made in accordance with the law and a person’s constitutional rights were given to him
or not. If the arrest is not in accordance with Section 41 of the CrPc, then the magistrate can not
authorize detention.
 In the case of Arnesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar Supreme Court held that, before authorization
of detention, a magistrate will record its own satisfaction, may, in brief, it is important that the
magistrate mentioned its own satisfaction on its order. It can not be based on the ipse dixit of
the police. If the magistrate finds that the arrest made by the police officer is not justifiable
then the magistrate can disallow police custody and release the person on bail or under the
special order under Section 59 of CrPc.
 The magistrate has to ensure and record the imperative need for police
custody at the time of giving police remand the need to uncover the weapon
of offence, the arrests of co-accused by the disclosures, and the investigation
of a larger conspiracy are an important consideration. However, mere
verification in the information provided by the accused does not constitute
grounds for police custody. And also remand can not be taken merely to
prepare a “pointing-out” memo and this must be ensured by the magistrate.
 Section 156 the power to order a further investigation of the magistrate is an independent power and
does not affect the powers of the investigation officer.
 It was held in the case of State of Bihar v. A.C. Saldana that the magistrate has the power to order
re-opening of the investigation even after the police submits the final report. For the purpose of
protecting the integrity of prosecution, it is important to monitor the investigation by the
magistrates.
 Supreme court in the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P held that Section 156 of Crpc empowers a
magistrate to check on the police while performing duties if the magistrate is not satisfied with the
investigation, he can also issue a direction to reinvestigation and he also has the power to monitor
the same.
 The result which is obtained after the investigation conducted by the police, the
court is not bound to accept that conclusion.
 In the case of Gangadhar Janardan Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra supreme court
held that cases in which police investigation concluded that there is no case
against the accused, the informant is entitled to notice and an opportunity to be
heard before the court at the time of consideration of the report.
 In Vinay Tyagi v. Irshad Ali court laid down some other considerations for further
investigation. It was also held that the result obtained from the further
investigation is called a “supplementary report” and can supplement the primary
police report and results from the earlier investigation can not be completely
neglected. The magistrate has no power to order a further investigation by a
different agency from the one who investigates first. Only the high court has the
power to do so and this happens in very rare and important cases.