Share :
Introduction
In a digital age where crimes transcend geographical boundaries with ease, the issue of jurisdiction in law enforcement becomes increasingly complex. Recently, the Kerala High Court in Noel Joseph v State of Kerala took a significant step in addressing this challenge by laying down comprehensive guidelines for police officers conducting investigations into cognizable offences committed beyond the territorial jurisdiction of their police station. This landmark decision not only clarifies procedural ambiguities but also underscores the imperative of ensuring justice regardless of geographical constraints.
UNDERSTANDING TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
Before delving into the specifics of the Kerala High Court’s guidelines, it’s crucial to comprehend the concept of territorial jurisdiction concerning police stations. Territorial jurisdiction refers to the geographical area within which a particular police station has the authority to investigate and initiate legal proceedings for offences committed within its boundaries.
CHALLENGES FACED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT
In today’s interconnected world, criminal activities often extend beyond the confines of a single jurisdiction. With advancements in technology and transportation, perpetrators can commit crimes in one area while residing or operating from another. This poses significant challenges for law enforcement agencies tasked with investigating and prosecuting such offences effectively.
CASE PARTICULARS
The accused, facing charges under IPC Sections 376 and 34 for rape, sought to quash the investigation report, arguing that the Vizhinjam Police Station lacked jurisdiction to investigate a crime committed in Ernakulam district. However, the Kerala High Court, citing precedents including Rasiklal Dalpatram Thakkar v. State of Gujarat and Satvinder Kaur v. State, ruled that police officers have the authority to investigate cases beyond their territorial limits, especially when directed by the court under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, 1973. The Court emphasized that procedural irregularities do not prejudice the investigation’s validity and affirmed the jurisdiction of the Ernakulam court where the case is pending.
In dismissing the petition, the Court upheld the legality of the investigation conducted by the Vizhinjam Police, finding no prejudice to the accused. It reiterated the duty of police officers to investigate cognizable offences after the filing of an FIR, as mandated by law. Moreover, it underscored that the jurisdiction for trial lies with the court where the offence occurred, thus affirming the jurisdiction of the Ernakulam court over the matter.
KERALA HIGH COURT’S RULING
The specific guidelines laid down by the Kerala High Court to address the challenges are as follows:
- An officer in charge of a police station, irrespective of his jurisdiction is competent to record every information in writing about the commission of a cognizable offence.
- The power of police in charge of a police station is extensive with that of the Court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such Station, having the power to enquire into or try that offence.
- A criminal court has jurisdiction to enquire or try an offence only when it was committed within its jurisdiction.
- If a police officer can record the commission of a cognizable offence that took place outside its jurisdiction, he has to forward the recorded/registered FIR to the police station that has the jurisdiction.
- No absolute prohibition that an 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.
- Once an investigation is started. It cannot be challenged in a court on the grounds that police officers investigating it lack jurisdiction.
- If a police officer conducts an investigation that was committed beyond its jurisdiction or as per orders of the Court, the result of such investigation is to be submitted as provided under Sections 168, 169, and 170 of CrPC, 1973.
- If the police officer has investigated a case beyond its territorial jurisdiction, after completion of the investigation, it shall forward the accused, 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 CrPC, 1973.
- The court can verify and decide jurisdiction, on receiving a complaint regarding the commission of a cognizable offence to forward the case to a police station for registration of FIR and investigation. And, once such a 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.
CONCLUSION
In an era characterized by unprecedented interconnectedness and mobility, the concept of jurisdiction in law enforcement cannot remain static. The Kerala High Court’s proactive stance in formulating guidelines for cross-jurisdictional police investigations sets a commendable precedent for other jurisdictions to follow. By embracing technological advancements, fostering interagency collaboration, and upholding legal and ethical standards, these guidelines herald a new chapter in the quest for justice one where boundaries do not limit the pursuit of truth and accountability.
For more information or queries, please email us at
[email protected]
