Statement Made During Enquiry At Pre FIR Stage Neither A Confession Nor A Statement U/s 160 CrPC: Supreme Court
The SC observed that the statements made during the open enquiry at the Pre-FIR stage cannot be said to be a statement u/s 160 CrPC & the statement to be recorded during the course of investigation as per the CrPC & therefore cannot be used against the accused during the course of the trial.
Such a statement cannot be said to be confessional in character, & as & when & if such a statement is considered to be confessional, in that case only, it can be said to be a statement which is self-incriminatory; which was impermissible in law; the bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah observed. The bench added that the Statement and the information so received during the course of discrete enquiry shall be only for the purpose to satisfy & find out whether an offence is disclosed.
In this case; the HC dismissed the challenge against a notice issued to the appellant by the Police Inspector, Anti Corruption Bureau, Nagpur; by which the appellant was called upon to give his statement in respect of the properties owned by him; for the purpose of enquiring the complaint against him; alleging accumulating the assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.
The contention raised in an appeal issued in purported exercise of power U/S 160 Cr.P.C., but since the appellant could not a witness in the case; Section 160 Cr.P.C. shall not be applicable at all. On the other hand; the state contended that the notice was issued to clarify his assets & known sources of income; which would enable the IO to ascertain whether the cognizable offence is disclosed or not. Section 160 of Cr.P.C. was submitted.
In appeal; the Bench considered the question of whether such an enquiry at the pre-FIR stage would be legal and to what extent such an enquiry is permissible?
Referring to Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014) 2 SCC 1.;
the bench observed that an enquiry at the pre-FIR stage is held to be permissible & not only permissible but desirable; more particularly in cases where the allegations are of misconduct of corrupt practice acquiring the assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.
Referring to the impugned notice; the bench observed that; the information sought therein has a direct connection with the allegations made i.e; accumulating assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.
The same is not fishing or roving enquiry. Such a statement cannot be said to be a statement u/s 160 & the statement to be recorded during the course of investigation as per the CrPC. Even such a statement cannot use against the appellant during the course of the trial. Statement of the appellant and the information so received during the course of discrete enquiry shall be only for the purpose to satisfy & find out whether an offence u/s 13(1)(e) of the PC Act, 1988 is disclosed. Such a statement cannot be said to be confessional in character, & as & when &/or if such a statement is considered to be confessional, in that case only, it can be said to be a statement which is self-incriminatory, which can be said to be impermissible in law.
While dismissing the appeal; the bench clarified that statements made by the appellant during open enquiry shall not be treated as a confessional statement.
Read more blogs @advocatetanwar.com