Investigation Is Not Vitiated Even If It Is Conducted By Police Officer Having No Jurisdiction Over Area Where Crime Was Registered: Kerala HC

The Kerala High Court observed that even if investigation was conducted by a Police Officer having no jurisdiction over the area in which the crime was registered, the investigation will not be vitiated.

The Court clarified that the trial has to be conducted by the court having jurisdiction over the area where the offence was committed.

The Court observed thus in a petition preferred by an accused seeking to quash a final report in a criminal case registered under Section 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and for a declaration that the Additional District Court has no jurisdiction to try such case.

A Single Bench of Justice Sophy Thomas held, "... of course, as far as trial is concerned, Section 177 of Cr.P.C. confers jurisdiction only on the Court within the local jurisdiction of which the offence was committed. So, even if, investigation was conducted by a Police Officer having no jurisdiction over the area in which the crime was registered, the investigation will not be vitiated going by Section 156(2) of Cr.P.C. But, the trial has to be conducted by the court having jurisdiction over the area where the offence was committed." 

“The petitioner has no case that any prejudice was caused to him by the investigation conducted by Vizhinjam Police. Moreover, the victim cannot be penalised for the procedural irregularities or technical defects if any committed by the investigating officer. Moreover, from the points we have deduced from the decisions of the Apex Court as well as of this Court, as detailed in paragraph 24, this Court is of the view that the investigation conducted by Vizhinjam Police is not vitiated. The Additional District Court, where the Sessions Case is now pending for trial, is having jurisdiction to try that case, as the offences alleged were committed within its local jurisdiction”, it also observed. 

Advocate Sebastian Joseph (Kurisummoottil) appeared on behalf of the petitioner/accused while Public Prosecutor Vipin Narayan appeared on behalf of the respondents.

In this case, in 2011, the victim girl left her house at Thiruvananthapuram and proceeded to Ernakulam and while travelling in the bus, she got acquainted with the accused and under his instigation, she alighted at Palluruthy along with him and from there, she was taken to various places by him and his friends. They sexually assaulted her and committed rape on her. Thereafter, she was abandoned at Ernakulam Railway Station and her father lodged a man missing complaint before the police station. A crime was registered under Section 57(1)(a) of the Kerala Police Act and the investigation started. Meanwhile, the victim was taken custody by police and was kept in women police station.

Since the victim; statement revealed sexual assault and rape against the accused, she was sent for medical examination and the FIR registered was altered, incorporating Section 376 read with Section 34 of IPC. A final report was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class Magistrate and the case was committed for trial to POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Court which was made over to the Special Court for trial. The accused filed a discharge petition before the Special Court on the ground that the police had no territorial jurisdiction to conduct the investigation but the same was dismissed. Subsequently, the case was transferred to Ernakulam which was pending before the Additional District Court.

The High Court in the above regard took note of the following points –

(i) An Officer in charge of a Police Station, irrespective of his jurisdictional competence, shall record every information received orally or in writing, relating to the commission of a cognizable offence.

(ii) The power of an Officer in charge of a Police Station to investigate into a cognizable offence is co-extensive with that of the Court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such Station, having power to enquire into or try that offence.

(iii) A Criminal Court ordinarily gets jurisdiction to enquire into or try an offence, only if that offence was committed within its local jurisdiction.

(iv) A Police Officer in charge of a Police Station, on recording information as to the commission of a cognizable offence that occurred outside its territorial jurisdiction, or registering an FIR based on that information, the proper course would be to forward the information recorded/FIR registered, to the Police Station having jurisdiction.

(v) There is no absolute prohibition that the offence committed beyond the local territorial jurisdiction cannot be investigated or enquired into by an Officer in charge of a Police Station, who recorded the information and registered the FIR.

(vi) The power of the Court to interfere with the investigation is limited. The investigation once started cannot be called in question by the Court at any stage, on the ground that the Police Officer investigating the same was lacking territorial jurisdiction.

(vii) A Police Officer investigating a case bona fide without noticing lack of territorial jurisdiction, or a Police Officer conducting investigation as per orders of a Court under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., even if that offence occurred beyond the territorial limits of that Police Station, the result of such investigation is to be submitted as provided under Sections 168, 169 and 170 of Cr.P.C.

(viii) When an Officer in charge of a Police Station conducts investigation in a case, in which he had no territorial jurisdiction to investigate, and after completing investigation, he is of the opinion that there is sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion, he has to forward the accused under custody, or if the offence is bailable, after taking security for his appearance, to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence/commit/try etc. under Section 170 of Cr.P.C.

(ix) It is for the Court receiving a complaint regarding commission of a cognizable offence to verify the jurisdiction of the Police Station to which the complaint has been forwarded under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. to register the crime and to conduct investigation, and once complaint is received as per orders of the Court, the Officer in charge of that Police Station, has no other go, but to register a crime and to investigate the same, even if the offence alleged was committed beyond its territorial limits.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petition and directed the Trial Court to proceed with the trial expeditiously and dispose the case within six months.

Cause Title- Noel Joseph v. State of Kerala & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KER:11365)

Click here to read/download the Judgment