An adequate, exhaustive, and proper investigation is a key prerequisite to prove allegations against the criminals, and to bring them to justice. Whereas an impartial investigation helps to reveal the truth of a case, a biased investigation report may divert the fate of the case.
Generally, in criminal cases, state becomes a party of the case to punish the perpetrators, and the police is the sole agency to conduct investigation regarding the suspected fact. Hence the duty of the police, to carry out a fair and independent investigation, is crucial to determine a case.
It is true that the police is not sufficiently equipped with resources, manpower, infrastructure, and, there is a serious scarcity of technology. In addition, investigating officers (IOs) do not get enough time to accomplish an efficient investigation due to their regular workload. At the same time, no one will deny that some police officers are reluctant to expense their merit, dedication, integrity and efficiency to run a proper investigation.
Moreover, there is a longstanding allegation that police are often influenced by the offenders to submit investigation reports in their favour. In many cases, perpetrators influence the IOs politically, socially or even through illegal transaction. As a result, the IOs submit final reports which indicate that there is no such incident, or the alleged persons are not involved with the occurrence.
However, it is a statutory obligation of the police to start investigation immediately after lodging of a First Information Report (FIR) by an informant or after getting an order from the concerned magistrate, and the IO is bound to finish the investigation within the stipulated time. Nonetheless, there is a scope to extend the time limit by taking prior approval from the court.
What is a police report?
The report submitted by the police after concluding an investigation regarding an alleged offence is a police report. The police has the power to submit either a charge sheet if the alleged offence has been primarily proved during the investigation, or can submit final report by showing no sufficient cause to warrant an action. Nevertheless, the magistrate is not bound to take the final reports submitted by the IOs.
Hence, one has no reason to feel helpless if the IO submits a final report. One can file a naraji (not agree) petition to the magistrate against such a final report.
How to file a naraji petition
If you have sufficient reason to believe that the IO was biased towards the perpetrators, or the IO did not conduct the investigation efficiently, you can file an application on white paper stating the reasons behind your belief and provide relevant evidences (if any) to reject the final report with a request that the investigation to be conducted again. That means the petitioner is not satisfied with the police report and he/she doesn’t accept the report. In that case, the appellant can apply for further or fresh investigation.
Consequence of taking cognizance of naraji petition
After taking such a petition the concerned magistrate will hear the statements of the accused persons and the IO about the alleged incident. The magistrate will also scrutinise all relevant documents including the case diary maintained by the IO.
If the appellant is being able to satisfy the magistrate that the submitted final report is a biased or incomplete one, the magistrate may direct the IO to perform further investigation or may order to conduct a fresh reinvestigation.
Alternatively, he/she can order to change the IO if it becomes evident that he/she was negligent while performing his/her duty. The court can also recommend to insert his/her inefficiency to his/her annual confidential report (ACR), or can propose to take departmental action against him/her to his/her concerned department.
If the magistrate thinks that the charge sheet will be adequate to ensure justice instead of a final report, he/she can pass an order to take the application as complaint petition and register the matter as complaint registered case and issue necessary orders to conduct an investigation. Further, the magistrate can order the officer in charge of the concerned police station to take the matter as an FIR and start a new investigation.
Moreover, the magistrate can arrange independent judicial inquiry by himself/herself or by his/her subordinate judicial officers to reveal the actual fact of the case after taking oath of the petitioner. He/she may ask local people to render necessary support to conduct that inquiry.
Afterwards, if a prima face case is established, the magistrate may serve summons to the accused persons to appear before him/her to defend the allegation against them. Alternatively, the court may issue a warrant of arrest against the accused persons. Moreover, if he/she thinks that a name should be inserted into the charge-sheet submitted to him/her, or a vital name has not been mentioned in that charge-sheet, he/she can order to investigate the matter further. However, an IO cannot remove or apply for removing any name from the charge sheet once inserted.
Relief against dismissal
After hearing both the parties and considering all the materials and documents, if the magistrate believes that there is no reason to proceed further on the basis of such a naraji petition, then he/she can dismiss the petition and can determine the matter at that stage on the basis of the final report submitted by the police. However, an aggrieved can file a revision application before the court of sessions judge or the High Court Division within 60 days from the date of such dismissal to set aside the decision.
Otherwise, if the magistrate discharges the accused persons from the trial by avoiding the petition, then the applicant can file a new complaint case to a competent magistrate, or can lodge a new FIR on the same matter to the concerned police station.
Caution
If any person lodges a naraji petition on the basis of false, fabricated and vexatious grounds merely to harass his/her opposite party, the magistrate can take legal action against the petitioner. Therefore, to file a naraji petition one needs to be very cautious about the authenticity of the facts of a case and should produce essential evidences to establish his/her claim before the court.
