Skip to main content

Evidence Collection in Criminal Procedure Law

This guide provides an overview of evidence collection procedures under India's Criminal Procedure Law, specifically focusing on Section 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It aims to assist law students and LLB students in understanding the legal framework surrounding evidence collection in criminal cases.

Scope of Evidence Collection​

Evidence collection is a crucial aspect of criminal investigations and prosecutions. The Indian legal system places significant emphasis on gathering reliable and admissible evidence to build strong cases against accused individuals.

The primary legislation governing evidence collection in India is the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Section 6 of this Act specifically deals with the power of police officers to seize property and make inquiries.

Key Concepts​

  1. Police Power to Seize Property
  2. Search Warrants
  3. Arrests and Searches Incident Thereto
  4. Confessions and Statements
  5. Electronic Evidence

Each of these concepts will be explored in detail throughout this guide.

[TOC]​

title: 6. Evidence Collection​

Evidence Collection Procedures

This chapter delves into the specific procedures and requirements for collecting evidence under India's Criminal Procedure Law, particularly focusing on Section 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Police Power to Seize Property​

Section 6(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 states:

"Any officer in charge of a police station may, without an order from a Magistrate and notwithstanding anything contained in [the Indian Penal Code], arrest such person."

This provision empowers police officers to seize property and conduct searches without a warrant in certain circumstances.

Case Study: Nandini Sundar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2011)​

In this landmark case, the Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutionality of Section 6(1). The court ruled that the provision was necessary to ensure effective investigation and prosecution of crimes.

Search Warrants​

While Section 6 allows for warrantless searches in some cases, Section 165 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides for the issuance of search warrants by Magistrates.

Case Study: Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1962)​

This case established the principle that a search warrant must be based on reasonable suspicion rather than mere hearsay.

Arrests and Searches Incident Thereto​

Section 46 of the Code of Criminal Procedure governs arret made during searches. It requires that arrested persons be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours.

Case Study: Joginder Singh v. State of U.P. (1955)​

This case emphasized the importance of proper documentation and recording of evidence collected during searches and arrests.

Confessions and Statements​

Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with the admissibility of confessions as evidence.

Case Study: Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal (1994)​

This case highlighted the need for caution when dealing with confessions obtained through coercive means.

Electronic Evidence​

With the increasing reliance on digital technology, electronic evidence has become increasingly relevant in criminal investigations.

Case Study: R. P. Kapur v. State (1955)​

This early case established the principle that documents can be used as evidence even if they are not originals.

[TOC]​

title: 6. Evidence Collection author: [Dr. P Bala Padma]​

Real-World Applications of Evidence Collection

This chapter presents several real-world case studies that illustrate the practical application of evidence collection principles discussed in previous chapters. These examples aim to provide law students and LLB students with concrete illustrations of how the legal framework is applied in actual criminal investigations and trials.

Case Study 1: The Nirbhaya Gang Rape Case (2012)​

Background​

On December 16, 2012, a brutal gang rape occurred in New Delhi, India. The case shocked the nation and led to widespread protests demanding justice for the victim.

Evidence Collection Process​

  1. Forensic examination of the victim's body revealed critical evidence.
  2. DNA samples were collected from the crime scene and matched with suspects.
  3. Mobile phone records and call data records were obtained as circumstantial evidence.
  • Section 53A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was invoked to obtain medical evidence.
  • Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was applied to allow the admission of dying declarations.
  • Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was used to admit secondary evidence of electronic records.

Outcome​

The case resulted in the conviction of four out of six accused individuals. The verdict was upheld by the Supreme Court of India in 2017.

Case Study 2: The Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (1984)​

Background​

On December 3, 1984, a gas leak from Union Carbide's pesticide plant in Bhopal killed thousands of people and injured many more.

Evidence Collection Challenges​

  • Destruction of physical evidence due to time delay initiating investigations.
  • Lack of proper documentation of environmental damage.
  • Section 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was invoked to conduct magisterial inquiries.
  • Section 14 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was applied to allow the admission of documentary evidence despite its condition.

Outcome​

The case resulted in a settlement between Union Carbide and the Government of India. However, many questions remain unanswered regarding the extent of corporate liability.

Conclusion​

These case studies demonstrate the complexities involved in evidence collection in real-world scenarios. They highlight the importance of adhering to legal procedures while adapting to unique circumstances presented by each case.

[TOC]