INVESTI GATION SKILLS TIME OF INVESTIGATION INVESTIGATION PRECEDES

INVESTI GATION SKILLS

TIME OF INVESTIGATION • INVESTIGATION PRECEDES ANY ENQUIRY/ DEPARTMENTAL PROCEEDINGS OR TRIAL

DISCREET VERIFICATION • CONDUCTED BEFORE/PRECEDES OPEN INVESTIGATION OR FIELD ENQUIRY; • CONDUCTED JUST TO CONFIRM WHETHER MISCONDUCT HAS BEEN CONDUCTED OR NOT; • CONDUCTED DISCREETLY (CAUTIOUSLY);

• SUSPECT & UNCONCERNED PERSONS SHOULD NOT COME TO KNOW : – IF FOUND FALSE OR MOTIVATED, THE SUSPECT OFFICER SHOULD NOT BE DEMOTIVATED, DEMORALIZED, DEFAMED, APPREHENSIVE OR DEFIANT; – IF FOUND TRUE OR HAVING SUBSTANCE THEN EVIDENCE MAY NOT BE TAMPERED WITH

PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION Collection of Evidence both oral & physical (documentary & articles

PURPOSE OF ENQUIRY/DEPTT. PROCEEDING OR TRIAL Evaluation of Oral & documentary evidence collected on the Scale of ‘ Rule of Evidence’ & ‘Principles of Natural Justice’

RULE OF EVIDENCE OF ORAL ENQUIRY/ DEPARTMENTAL ENQUIRY/DEPARTMENTAL PROCEEDINGS/DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS • PREPONDERANCE OF PROBABILITY THE STANDARD IS MET IF THE PROPOSITION IS MORE LIKELY TO BE TRUE THAN NOT TRUE. EFFECTIVELY, THE STANDARD IS SATISFIED IF THERE IS GREATER THAN 50 PERCENT CHANCE THAT THE PROPOSITION

NATURAL JUSTICE • that nobody should be a judge of his own cause and • secondly nobody should be condemned unheard i. e. without giving him the reasonable opportunity to defend himself

NOMENCLATURES Collection of Evidence • Investigation; • Field Enquiry; • Vigilance Case • Preliminary Enquiry (PE) Evaluation of Evidence • Oral Enquiry; • Departmental Enquiry (DE) • Departmental Proceedings • Disciplinary proceedings • Regular Departmental Action (RDA)

INVESTIGATION SKILLS • CORRELATION / INTERFACE BETWEEN ORAL & PHYSICAL EVIDENCE; • AUTHENTICITY OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE ( DOCUMENTS & ARTICLES ) THROUGH ‘ ORAL EVIDENCE’ • GETTING FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES PROVE THROUGH ORAL EVIDENCE WHERE NO CORROBORATORY OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AVAILABLE

• PROOF OF ALL FACTS BY ORAL EVIDENCE EXCEPT CONTENTS OF DOCUMENTS OR ELECTRONIC RECORD (S. 59 IEA, 1872) • ORAL EVIDENCE MUST BE DIRECT (S. 60 IEA, 1872) – WHO SAW; – WHO HEARD; – WHO PEPRCEIVED BY SENSE – WHO HOLD OPINION

• CONTENTS OF DOCUMENT BY PRIMARY OR SECONDAY EVIDENCE (s. 61 IEA, 1872) • PRIMARY EVIDENCE MEANS ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS (s. 62 IEA, 1872) • SECONDAY EVIDENCE MEANS CERTIFIED COPIES; MECHANICAL COPES; NORMAL COPIES OR ORAL ACCOUNTS

WHAT IS INVESTIGATION • SEC. 2(h) CR. P. C. INVESTIGATION INCLUDES ALL THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER CR. P. C. FOR COLLECTION OF EVIDENCE CONDUCTED BY A POLICE OFFICER OR BY ANY PERSON (OTHER THAN A MAGISTRATE) WHO IS AUTHORIZED BY A MAGISTRATE IN THE SAID BEHALF.

WHAT IS THE DUTY OF INVESTIGATION – Duty of the Investigating officer is not merely to booster up a prosecution case with such an evidence as may enable a court to record a conviction but to bring out the real unvarnished truth. –Jamuna V/s State of Bihar (1974 Cr. L. J. 890)

§ THE INVESTIGATION, THEREFORE, HAS; § to be truthful. § to be unbiased. § No pre-conceived notions (presumed & predecided mind). § Aimed at to reveal the total truth of the incident. § It thus also falls in line of Industry, Impartiality Integrity

THE OPEN INVESTIGATION APPROACH • RECORDING OF THE ALLEGATIONS • PREPARATION OF A PLAN/LINE OF INVESTIGATION • COLLECTION OF DOCUMENTS • IDENTIFICATION OF THE WITNESSES • EXAMINATION OF THE WITNESSES • SEEKING OF EXPERT ADVICE • PREPARATION OF A FINAL SUMMING UP REPORT • LEGAL VETTING

• EMPHASIS ON FIELD-ORIENTED INVESTIGATION RATHER THAN DESK-BOUND INVESTIGATION • EMPHASIZING MAINLY ON CORRESPONDENCE WITH VARIOUS PERSONS/AGENCIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING REQUIRED DOCUMENTS AND SECURING PRESENCE OF WITNESSES ADOPT A PREDOMINANTLY FIELDORIENTED APPROACH

COLLECTION OF EVIDENCE – Scrutinize the Documents closely, – Prepare Scrutiny Report – keeping in view the ingredients of misconduct under investigation. – The Supervisory Officers also to study documents and the Scrutiny Reports. – Examine relevant witnesses. – Further seizure of documents, if necessary. – EXAMINE THE ACCUSED AND VERIFY HIS DEFENCE.

EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES • NO DRAFT STATEMENT. • STATEMENT SHOULD BE WRITTEN IN THE PRESENCE OF THE WITNESSES AND READ OVER TO THEM. • IF POSSIBLE, GET THE CORRECTIONS, IF ANY, DONE BY THE WITNESS HIMSELF.

• FOR THAT PURPOSE THE FOLLOWING 11 WS NEED TO BE KEPT IN MIND : • • 1 st W : What information is conveyed ? • • 2 nd W 3 rd W : 4 th W : 5 th W 6 th W : 7 th W : 8 th W : In what capacity ? : (Whether as an eyewitness or hearsay). : Who. . . Who committed misconduct ? : Whom. . . against whom crime is committed ? : When ? (Time). Where ? (Spot) : Why ? (Motive) : Which way, i. e. how ?

• 9 th W : • 10 th W: • 11 th W: Witness or in whose presence. What was taken away by the misconduct, e. g. , any article etc. What traces were left by the accused, i. e. , any article, belongings, foot marks, finger marks, etc.

FINAL STEPS •

THANK YOU

JAI BHARAT