Source: Allahabad High Court  

Why in News? 

The Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings against a couple. Accused had removed the deceased individual, who accompanied his mother to the hospital, and later died in a road accident.  

• The court noted that a special investigation team had ruled out culpable homicide, and the couple's appeals against the magisterial and sessions court decisions were upheld. 
• Justices Saurabh Shyam Shamshery  in the matter of Dr. Rajesh Singh And Another v. State of U.P. and Another. 

What was the Background of Dr. Rajesh Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another? 

• The case involves a complaint against a couple doctors who run Singh Life Care Hospital in Ghazipur district. 
• On 19th September, 2015, a man named Anandi Singh Yadav filed a First Information Report (FIR) alleging that his son died at the hospital on the night of September 18-19, 2015. 
• The FIR accused the doctor couple and unknown persons of murder, rioting, causing hurt, and intentional insult. 
• The complainant claimed that when his son went to call the doctors, they beat him severely, resulting in his death.  
  • The complainant, his daughter, and nephew claimed to be eyewitnesses. 
• A post-mortem report found 24 injuries on the deceased's body and concluded the cause of death was "Coma and Haemorrhagic shock as a result of Ante-Mortem Injuries." 
• During the investigation, conflicting statements emerged:  
• The complainant and his daughter maintained their initial accusation against the doctors. 
• The complainant's nephew gave a different version, stating that a dispute arose between the deceased and other patients' attendants, which was intervened by hospital staff.  
  • He said the deceased was then taken outside the hospital and later died in an accident. 
• A Special Investigation Team (SIT) took over the case.  
  • They conducted lie detector and narco tests on four witnesses, including the daughter and nephew. 
• The investigation concluded with a Final Report stating that the deceased died due to a road accident, not homicide. 
• The complainant filed a protest petition against this Final Report. 
• The Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the Final Report's conclusion and issued summons to the doctor couple and others under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. 
• The doctor couple appealed this decision, first through a Revision Petition (which was dismissed), and then by approaching the High Court. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The High Court states that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) conducted a thorough and comprehensive investigation, which should not have been summarily rejected without substantial reasons. 
• The court ruled that to reject the Final Report and issue summons, the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) was required to provide substantive reasons, which were found to be lacking in this case. 
• The High Court held that scientific test results (including Lie Detector and Narco Analysis) and witness statements could not be disregarded merely due to perceived implausibilities or omissions, and that the Trial Court failed to properly analyze this evidence. 
• The court observed that summoning is a serious matter, especially when done after rejecting an investigation's outcome, and requires substantive reasons that were absent in the impugned order. 
• Based on a detailed analysis of the evidence, the High Court quashed the proceedings against all accused persons, concluding that it was a case of accidental death rather than homicide. 
• While quashing the impugned orders and proceedings, the court clarified that its judgment does not prevent the complainant from pursuing other legal alternatives before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, in accordance with the law. 

What is a Closure Report? 

About : 

• A closure report, also known as a report under Section 169 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) currently in Section 189 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 BNSS,  is submitted by investigating authorities to the magistrate when there is insufficient evidence or reasonable grounds to justify forwarding the accused for trial. 
• The closure report states that there is no evidence or reasonable grounds of suspicion to justify proceeding further against the accused.  
  • It allows for the release of the accused from custody on bond. 
• Even if a closure report is filed, the magistrate has the power to direct the police to conduct further investigation if deemed necessary. 
• The magistrate has the discretion to reject a closure report and take cognizance of the case if they find sufficient grounds to proceed, despite the police report stating no case is made out. 
• Filing an unwarranted closure report or proceeding with prosecution when there is clearly no evidence can be considered a violation of the accused's right to fair investigation and trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. 
• The courts have emphasized that criminal law and prosecutions should not be used as tools of harassment when there is no material evidence connecting an accused to a crime

What are the Legal Provisions Involved? 

• Section 189  
  • Section 189 deals with release of accused when evidence is deficient  
  • If an investigation reveals insufficient evidence or reasonable grounds of suspicion against the accused, the officer in charge of the police station must release the accused if they are in custody. 
  • The release is conditional upon the accused executing a bond or bail bond as directed by the officer. 
  • The bond requires the accused to appear before a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence on a police report when required. 
  • This provision ensures that accused persons are not unnecessarily detained when there is a lack of substantial evidence against them. 
• Section 193 
  • Section 193 deals with Report of police officer on completion of investigation. 
  • Section 193 (1) states that every investigation under this Chapter must be completed without unnecessary delay. 
  • Section 193(2) deals with the  specific offences (sections 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or sections 4, 6, 8, 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012), the investigation must be completed within two months from the date of recording the information. 
  • Submission of Police Report (Section 193) 
    • Upon completion of the investigation, the officer in charge must forward a report to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence. 
    • The report can be sent through electronic communication. 
    • The report must include specific details such as names of parties, nature of information, names of potential witnesses, whether an offence appears to have been committed and by whom, arrest status of the accused, and other relevant information. 
  • Communication with Informant/Victim Section 193(3) 
    • The police officer must inform the informant or victim about the progress of the investigation within 90 days, including through electronic communication. 
    • The officer must also communicate the action taken to the person who first gave the information about the offence. 
  • Role of Superior Officers Section 193(4) 
    • In cases where a superior officer of police has been appointed, the report may need to be submitted through that officer as per government directives. 
    • The superior officer can direct further investigation pending the Magistrate's orders. 
  • Documents to be Forwarded with Report (Section 193) 
    • The police officer must forward all relevant documents or extracts on which the prosecution intends to rely, along with statements of proposed prosecution witnesses. 
    • The officer can request the Magistrate to exclude certain parts of statements if deemed not relevant or if disclosure is not in the public interest. 
  • Provision for Further Investigation Section 193(9) 
    • Further investigation is allowed even after the initial report has been forwarded to the Magistrate. 
    • Any additional evidence obtained must be reported to the Magistrate in the prescribed form. 
    • During trial, further investigation may be conducted with the court's permission and must be completed within 90 days, extendable with court approval. 
  • Supply of Documents to Accused, Section 193 (8) 
    • The investigating officer must submit copies of the police report and other documents for supply to the accused. 
    • Supply of reports and documents through electronic communication is considered valid service.