non-party caretaker govt

8/7/2019 Non-party caretaker Govt.

1/61

Chapter-I

Introduction

Introduction: The formal and organized policing with varieties of activities as

of today has come to this stage through lot of evolutions and developments

across the long time. The policing, indeed, started from the very beginning of

the settlement of the ancient nomads and living in an organized social texture

that originated from the day they learnt to produce their food through

agriculture, animal husbandry and poultry. When the nomads started living in

society, the necessity of keeping peace and order became inevitable. Though

the present structure of policing in Bangladesh and India bears much of the

British heritage, it has long history which started in the ancient period and ran

through the middle age to the British and finally to the present time, having a

lot of changes and developments.

The police in Bangladesh is a centralized national force. its functions are

contro1led by the Ministry of Home Affairs while the operational

responsibilities are vested in Police Headquarters. Inspector General is the

chief executive of the police departments. Bangladesh police follow the

British police system of the colonial era with some minor modifications.During the British rule the police was a repressive institution and their main

purpose was to serve the interest of ruling class (Robb, 1991). At present the

police administration is governed by the Police Act of 1861, and operational

aspects are guided by the Police Regulation of Bengal (PRB), 1943. Also, the

Home Ministry has the power to issue administrative regulations on personnel

and police operations.

There are three main branches in the police department: Traffic. Special,

and Detective branch. In addition to that, there is Central Investigation

Department (CID) which deals with the high profile and serious cases. Unlike

many countries, police departments in Bangladesh do not have separate vice

unit to fight prostitution, gambling, and narcotics. Recently Highway Police

a new unit has been introduced Policing activities are carried out from a

central office known as police station (Thana) in both urban and rural areas.

There are presently 539 police stations in Bangladesh. The officer in charge

(O.C.) of a police station is responsible for maintaining law and order and

1


2/61

prevention and detection of crimes in his jurisdiction. The metropolitan police,

a separate wing within the police department is responsible for policing the

major cities of the country. (Website, Ministry of Home Affairs)

Police officers are categorized as gazetted and non-gazetted, roughly

analogous to commissioned and non-commissioned officers in the military

services. The top four managerial positions are Inspector General of Police

(IGP), Additional Inspector General, Deputy Inspector General (DIG), and

Superintendent of Police (SP). The non-gazetted category consists of

Inspector, Sub-Inspector (SI), and Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI).

Superintendent (SP) of a district and Officer-in-Charge (OC) of a Thana are

the two most powerful officers in the police administration. The lowerechelons of the police known as constable and constitutes 80 percent of the

police force.

2


3/61

Chapter-II

History of Police

Introduction: Police History In the beginning, there was kin policing, with

its penchant for blood feuding and traditions of tribal justice. Many pre-

civilized villages or communities are believed to have had a rudimentary form

of law enforcement (morals enforcement) derived from the power and

authority of kinship systems, rule by elders, or perhaps some form of totemism

or naturism. Under kin policing, the family of the offended individual was

expected to assume responsibility for justice by capturing, branding, or

mutilating the offender. To be sure, there were also theocratic institutions

(religious temples, magic rituals, grand viziers), but these were probably used

as a system of appeals (sanctuary, refuge) and for purposes not associated with

justice. Since war has existed, the police function has been somewhat

inseparable from the military function as ancient rulers almost always kept

elite, select units (bodyguards) close at hand to protect them from threats and

assassination attempts, and although it was more theocratic than militaristic,

the argument could be made that the first known civilization (Egypt) was a

police state.

In Mesopotamia, the rise of cities like Uruk, Umma, Eridu, Lagash, and Ur is

widely regarded as the "birth of civilization". However, these cities were in a

state of constant warfare, and in terms of looking at which residents bore the

closest resemblance to police officers, the argument could be made that

captured Nubian slaves were the first police force. This group was often put to

work as marketplace guards, Praetorian guards, or in other mercenary-like

positions. As a police force, their different color, stature, and manner of dress

made them quite visible among the Mesopotamians. The idea of visibility

could then be regarded as the first principle of crime control.

With the rise of the city-states came forms of criminal justice that could be

considered as king's policing. It's conventional to note that things like the

Code of Hammurabi marked the first known system of criminal law as well as

the start of other practices. The Hebrews developed the Mosaic Law and a

3


4/61

rudimentary adversverdana system. The Greeks experimented with highway

patrol and jury trials (Athens) as well as secret police and mercenary systems

(Sparta). Across Africa, trials were being conducted while sitting down (three-

legged stools of justice). Violators were brought before thrones of justice in

the name of the crown, and to keep the peace meant, for the most part, keeping

the king's peace of mind. Greek philosophy (Aristotle, Plato) was largely

responsible for popularizing the majesty of justice by associating good law

and order with virtue.

History: It's widely recognized that the first organized police force were the

Roman vigiles, the first group of nonmilitary and non-mercenary police. They

were created by Gaius Octavius, the grand nephew of Julius Caesar, around 27

B.C. After his uncle was assassinated, little Octavius swore revenge and rose

to power with a desire to reform Roman society. Once he became ruler, he

took the name Augustus Caesar, or more simply Augustus, the first emperor of

Rome. Let's take a close look at the steps involved in establishment of the

world's first organized police force:

The first thing Augustus did was create a special unit, called the Praetorian

Guard, to protect him from assassination. 9000 men were selected and divided

into 9 cohorts of 1000 each. 3 of these cohorts operated as undercover

operatives housed among the civilian residents. The Praetorian Guard

eventually became involved in assassination plots themselves, and were

disbanded or reabsorbed by the military.

The second thing Augustus did was create a daytime city fire brigade of

600 slaves and spread them among 14 separate precincts. The slaves proved

inadequate and were disbanded, but the prefect (precinct) system proved

workable.

The slave fire brigade was replaced by urban cohorts, headed by a prefect

of the urban cohorts. These were a less select military unit of men who weren't

good enough to get into the Praetorian Guard. They were several thousand of

them. They were primarily responsible for fire safety during daytime hours,

and they were fairly inadequate at it.

4


5/61

The urban cohorts were supplemented by nighttime cohorts, and there

were several thousand of them, recruited and selected from among freedmen

only. They were known as the vigiles (watchmen) of Rome, and were

empowered not only to fight fires but to arrest law breakers. The prefect of the

vigiles eventually became a powerful man, passing judgment on most

lawbreakers, except for serious lawbreakers who had to be turned over to the

prefect of the urban cohorts. The vigiles were armed with clubs as well as

short swords. They eventually took over the duties of the urban cohorts.

MIDDLE AGES (400 A.D. - 1600 A.D.)

The middle ages either had no system of law enforcement or one of two

systems, depending upon what part of the world you were in. Where lawenforcement existed, it was most likely a variety of the watch system -- a

system premised on the importance of voluntarily patrolling the streets and

guarding cities from sunset to sunrise ("2 A.M. and all's well"). The

predominant function of policing became class control (keeping watch on

vagrants, vagabonds, immigrants, gypsies, tramps, thieves, and outsiders in

general). Despite some innovations during this time period (the Magna Carta

of 1215 being a notable example), most of this era was characterized by

lawlessness and corruption. By the 1500s, there was no country in the world

with more robbers, thieves, and prostitutes than England. Other countries, too,

experienced lawlessness to such a degree that citizen groups, known as

vigilantes, sprang up to combat crime.

The formal and organized policing with varieties of activities as of today has

come to this stage through lot of evolutions and developments across the long

time. The policing, indeed, started from the very beginning of the settlement

of the ancient nomads and living in an organized social texture that originated

from the day they learnt to produce their food through agriculture, animal

husbandry and poultry. When the nomads started living in society, the

necessity of keeping peace and order became inevitable. Though the present

structure of policing in Bangladesh and India bears much of the British

heritage, it has long history which started in the ancient period and ran through

the middle age to the British and finally to the present time, having a lot of

changes and developments.

5


6/61

Ancient Period

Bangladesh Police has an ancient history and heritage. The history of

Bangladesh Police may be found in the components of the history of theancient period. The civilization of Bangladesh is older than that of the west.

Bramhalipi was found at Mahastangar much earlier than the birth of Jesus

Christ. Manushanghita, the hieroglyphics of Emperor Ashoka, and the stories

of renowned travelers are the main sources of composing our history. These

sources also give clues to compose the fragmented history of Bangladesh

Police. In Orthoshastra by Koutilla, nine types of spies are mentioned. During

that period policing was confined in the efforts of collecting intelligence in

order to curb anti-governmental activities and to maintain law and order in the

society. The duties of undercover spies were extended such a way that they

used to conduct surveillance over the activities of ministers, civil and military

officials. All means of temptations and instigations were used; though Koutilla

thought that the king shouldnt have made the queen an object of character test

of his councilors. Information about investigating techniques and investigating

authorities may be found in Orthoshastra. The procedures of punishing the

accused are also found in this book. It is mentioned in Horshocharito,written

by Huen Shang about thousand years later than the time of Orhoshastra, that

crimes of heinous nature were very rare in those days. However, highways and

river routes were not very safe in those days. The author himself had been a

victim of robbery on several occasions.

Hence it may be assumed that there was one kind of police under the local

autonomous system in the rural and urban areas. Two designations namely-

Sthanik and Nagorik were there to conduct trials, to solve disputes of minor

nature, to sanction monetary punishments and to impose social regulations and

restrictions. In remote rural areas, heads of villages were responsible for

maintaining law and order and for collecting information regarding the

movements and activities of strangers. In the ancient period there was actually

no organized and independent policing system in our country. Some of the

activities of police were carried out by few assigned personnel.

6


7/61

Medieval Period.

Details of policing activities during the middle age cannot be found as well.

However, during the periods of the great sultans, an official holding theposition of Muhtasib used to perform the duties of policing. This person

happened to be the chief of police and the in charge of public works and the

inspector of public ethics simultaneously. In urban areas, Kotwals were

responsible for performing police duties. Information regarding police systems

during the Mughal period can be found in the book Aain-E-Akbori. The

policing system introduced by Shershah Shuri, was further organized during

the period of Emperor Akber, the great. The Emperor organized his

administrative structure introducing Fouzdari (the principal representative of

the Emperor), Mir Adal and Kazi (the head of judicial department) and Kotwal

(the chief police official of larger cities). This system was very effective in

maintaining the law and order in cities. The Kotwal police system was

implemented in Dhaka City. Many district sadar police stations are still called

Kotwali police stations. In Mughal period Kotwal emerged as an institution.

According to the historians the Kotwal was minor luminary under the

Muhtasib. The wide powers of the latter and the nature of his duties required

him to keep his eyes and ears always open. He used spies and the regular

police for this purpose. The routine duty of the police was to patrol throughout

the day and night to guard vantage points. Leading men were appointed

wardens in every quarter of the city; and thus public co-operation was enlisted.

The Kotwal maintained a register of inhabitants within his limits, noting down

their address and his instructions, so that the particulars of the people without

jobs and those living on other people's stupidity or gullibility came to his

notice without any delay. It was therefore, easy for him to note the arrival anddeparture of strangers and keep track of them. He was also a committing

magistrate. The force under him was entirely civil in character."

A Fouzdar was appointed to every administrative unit of the government

(district). There were some artillery and cavalry forces under the Fouzdar.

Thanadars was appointed dividing the parganas into small localities. There

was a disciplined police system during the Mughal period though there was no

professional police force like that of the British period. In general, it may be

opined that there was a remarkable development in the maintenance of law

7


8/61

and order and criminal administration during the reign of the Muslim rulers.

"To maintain law and order and to suppress criminals in a vast empire with

medieval means of communication and transport was a Herculean task. To

achieve that goal, the means adopted by the Muslim Rulers were -

benevolence, justice, personal supervision of criminal administration, speedy

remedy, emphasis on prevention and punishments - drastic enough to cause

awe and sustain public confidence." (Quoted in Our Police Heritage, by N.A.

Razvi, Lahore 161, Page-20).

British Period.

The police system inherited by the jamindars continued during the initialperiod of the British rule. In 1765 the standards of the barniks turned into the

standards of the kings. The British Raj had taken initiative to reform the police

administration in order to realize their objectives of increasing revenue

collection. There had hardly been any changes in the police system before the

event of turning the supervisors into collectors in 1770. As per the Regulation

of 15th August of 1772, two types of courts namely- Civil Court and Criminal

Court were established. The Collectors used to supervise the proceedings of

Civil Courts. As the President of the Council, Warren Hastings appointed

fourteen Fouzdars in Bengal for the first time. Mohammed Reza Khan, who

used to reside in Murshidabad, was appointed as Nayeb Suba and Nayeb

Nazim in order to conduct the criminal court and to run administration on 15

October 1775.

On 7 December 1792 Lord Cornowalice imposed the Police Regulations in

Bangla, Bihar and Urissha collectorate areas. As a result, the era of keeping

police forces by the Jamindars came to an end. The entire country was divided

into several police areas and one daroga was appointed for each area under the

supervision of District Magistrate. Each district was divided into several

police areas, each comprising of 400 square miles, and one daroga was in

charge of each police area. Darogas could not be removed without the

approval of the government. Ten percent commission on the value of

recovered stolen property and ten taka for arresting dacoits used to be

awarded. This Regulation re-introduced as Regulation XXII of 1793. This

police system introduced by Cornowalice was well-known as thanadari system

8


9/61

and this system marked the beginning of the hierarchy in the police

department. However, Lord Moira remarked about this system as follows

"This police system was introduced not so much for the protection of the

people or prevention of crime, but was devised exclusively for strengthening

the arms of the Magistrate and exercising an efficient control over the police

of the interior."

According to Regulation X of 1808, the officers of the rank of the

Superintendent of Police was given the responsibility of Dhaka and other

cities. This post was abolished in 1829 and the responsibilities of the

Superintendent of Police were handed over to the Commissioner of Revenue

and Circuit. In 1837 the former post was re-introduced and later in 1854 the

same post was again abolished by Dalhoushi. However, in 1861 the post of the

Superintendent of Police was re-established through The Police Act, 1861 and

it was given enhanced status and authority.

Acts and regulations regarding police administration were brought under

single umbrella by implementing Regulation XX of 1817 and The Police

Manual in Bengal was introduced for the first time. The duties of all officials

from the rank of Sub- Inspector to above were stated in 34 sections. In 1838 a

committee headed by Mr. Bard was formed. The Bard Committee

recommended strengthening chaukidari system and to enhance the pay of Sub-

Inspectors and also to provide the latter enough job security. One of the

members of the Committee named Mr. Haliday recommended an overall

reform of the police appointing a Superintendent General in the province, 23

Superintendents in the districts, 32 Assistant Superintendents, 888 Sub-

Inspectors, 8880 Jamadars and 66600 Barkondazs. This reform, however,

could not bring the desired result.

The effort of finding a solution based on the colonial concepts, to enhance law

and order situation finds headway all on a sudden. Sir Charles Napier

occupied Sindh for East India Company. There was neither any village police

nor revenue management system in Sindh. As a result there was a scope of

introducing a new administrative system in Sindh. He wanted to establish a

police system like the Irish Constabulary and to man it by his own officers.

However, it could be mentioned that the philosophy of the Irish Constabulary

9


10/61

introduced by Sir Robert Peel, was of different nature. All functions of the

Irish Constabulary used to be run as per the directives of the Inspector

General. However, unlike the British Chief Constable he did nt have the

authority over his own force. The former had different relationships with the

appointing authority and with other components of the government. The

British Chief Constable was not accountable to any elected person or authority

or to the state secretary or to bar council or to any watch committee.Only the

judicial department had limited control over him. This is why it is said ".......

that in operational matters a Chief Constable is answerable to God, his Queen,

his conscience, and to no one else." (E. St. Johonston, One Policeman's Story,

Page-153). While differentiating between the two police forces of two

countries, John Tobais remarked- "English policemen were, from the earliest

days of the Metropolitan Police, thought of their force as separate from the rest

of the apparatus of the state, and would have hotly denied any responsibility to

the government; an English policeman today will still distinguish between the

government and the law, and will declare that he obeys the latter and not the

former. To an Irish policeman these distinctions did not exit. His force was

part of the apparatus of the state, and he was not really in any different

position from any other public servant."

Royal Irish Constabulary used to work as a weapon of the directives of the

politicians though it was a part of the administration. With the patronization of

the Under Secretary Tomas Durumond, this force became the most powerful

police in entire Europe. It is said- "It became under his hands an almost perfect

machine, which, like a delicate musical instrument, responded at once from

the remotest part of Ireland, to his touch in Dublin Castle." Historian Charlok

Zefris truly stated that a government was required to have an organized forceto impose its own law and regulations in a different country. It would not have

been possible to establish its rule and maintain law and order without having

such a force.

It was inevitable to reform the police after the great revolution of 1857. In

August 1860 a police commission was formed after the great revolution with a

view to tackling temporary armed units, addressing ever increasing financial

liabilities, improving the image of police to the public, curbing and preventing

crime and enhancing the quality of investigation. Lord Canning appointed H

10


11/61

M Court as the Chairman of this Commission directing the latter to submit

recommendations to form a complete and financially viable police force. The

report of the Commission had been approved with few changes and was

passed as The Police Act 1861 (Act no. V of 1861).

This Act was immediately implemented in Bengal, Bihar and Urrisshah. This

Act was implemented phase by phase in other parts of the country except

Kolkata, Mumbai, Madras and Sindh. The Police Act, 1861 enabled to form a

well-organized and well-structured police force. This Act passed the

challenges of time and provided a strong foundation to the policing activities

in this country. The Police Act, 1861 is considered a milestone in the history

of police in the subcontinent. Some of the main features of this Act are as

follows-

1. To organize the force into district, circle and police station levels. To

appoint an officer of the rank of Superintendent to take responsibility of a

district.

2. The practical activities of the police force lacked independence and

originality though it had to accept all responsibilities regarding the

criminal administration.

3. This force did not have any objective, mission or vision.

4. The force had been divided into armed and unarmed branches.

5. The force had actually been organized for rural areas.

6. This Act enabled the Inspector General to formulate regulations with the

approval of the government.

7. Emphasis was given to maintain status-que but nothing was included to

enhance professional efficiency.

8. A Special Armed Force was created to tackle emergency situation and to

maintain law and order.

9. Provision was kept to appoint European citizens to higher ranks and to

appoint local citizens to provincial cadres.

10. Inspectors and Sub-Inspectors were brought under higher sub-ordinate

service while Head Constables and Constables were brought under lower

sub-ordinate service. Although in each police station one Head Constable

had been appointed to maintain files and records and another had been

appointed to assist the Sub-Inspector in general administrative works.

They were not given the authority to investigate cases by any means.

11. Constables were given the responsibilities of escort, patrol and guard

duties.

11


12/61

12. Importance was given on training. According to the recommendation of

the Commission, a Police Training College for officers was established.

As per the recommendation of the Commission of 1902, a training

college had been founded at Mount Abu, India. Provincial cadre DSPs

and Indian Police Cadre officers used to be trained in this college. In

1903 two training schools were established in Rajshahi and at Mill

Barrack in Dhaka. Bengali cadets and constables had been trained in

these two colleges till 1912. Police Academy, Sardah, Rajshahi district

was the only higher-level training institution in Bangladesh. The first

principal of this institution was Major H. Chamney (1912-1919).

Fresher Commission (1902-1903) elaborately described police-magistracy

relationship. The Commission remarked on the failure of The Police Act, 1861

and on the dual control over police, "It will be a sufficient safeguard of the

interests which are committed to his (District Magistrate) charge if he is

empowered to direct the superintendent to make an inquiry into the conduct of

any subordinate police officer....... To go further than that will be to weaken

the authority of the superintendent and to lessen his sense of responsibility.

There is no necessity for the dual control and the undue interference of the

District Magistrate. Besides being unsound in principle, this has led to

practical elimination of the Deputy Inspector General and the reduction of his

position to that of an inspecting and reporting office, which has greatly

impaired his usefulness (para 115-124).

In 1902 another committee was formed by Lord Carzon. According to the

recommendations of this Committee, the colonial police was further

organized. The main recommendations were as follows-

1. Appointing a Deputy Inspector General as the administrative head, a

department of criminal investigation was formed in each Province. A

special branch was also opened under his control in order to collect

intelligence regarding crime and political matters.

2. Each Province was divided in to several ranges for administrative

benefits and a Deputy Inspector General was given the charge of each

range.

3. A position of Deputy Superintendent of Police to assist the

Superintendent was created.

4. In some Provinces independent railway police forces were created and

12


13/61

the charges of these ranges were given to officers of the rank of Deputy

Inspector General.

5. Each district was divided into several circles. The area of each circle was

150 square miles and a Sub-Inspector was to be in charge of each circle.

As a result, a cadre of Sub-Inspectors was created for the first time in the

country and this brought the end of darogas, thanadars and kotwals.

6. Salaries and other benefits of all members of the police from the ranks of

constables to IGP were enhanced. At the same time, recruitment rules

were created and standards of rules were formulated.

7. Departmental and judicial punitive measures were introduced for police

officers.

8. Police was organized as force rather than a service organization.

Arrangements were made to bring the police department under the control of

Inspector General. He was the chief inspector and ultimate controlling

authority of the police department. Thus the executive authorities of

Divisional Commissioners were curtailed. To assist the Inspector General, the

post of Deputy Inspector General had been created. At district level a

Superintendent was responsible for the internal financial matters, proper

management and efficiency matters of the police force. The Superintendent

would work under the control of the IGP.

Sub-ordinate force was created comprising of Inspectors, Head Constables,

Sergeants and Constables. Head Constables would command police stations

and several police stations were under the control of an Inspector. Village

chaukidars were designed to assist the police department at the grass root

level. According to the recommendations of the Committee all officers would

be Europeans. It was clearly stated that Divisional Commissioners would not

have responsibilities regarding police matters. Any Magistrate below thedesignation of District Magistrate would not interfere into the affairs of police.

However, District Magistrate had been given authority over the district police

since he was responsible for the overall affairs of the district including law and

order situation.

As a result of India Rule Act of 1919 and 1935, reforms in administrative

management of the country became inevitable. In 1937 Blandy Gordon

Committee submitted some recommendations and some reforms initiatives

13


14/61

were taken though much could not be done due to the World War 11.

Pre-Liberation Period (1947 to 1971)

After the emergence of Pakistan in 1947, the Police force of this country was

named, at first, as East Bengal Police and later as East Pakistan Police. In East

Pakistan, this police force started working as provincial police force. In this

period East Pakistan police force experienced various organizational, financial

and other problems. Reforms in the organizational structure became essential.

In 1953 Shahabuddin Report and in 1956 Hatch Burnwell report

recommended enhancement of the organizational structures of Dhaka Police

and Narayangonj Police. These reports also recommended increasing the

number of police forces of Dhaka and Narayangonj districts. However, no

constructive efforts were taken of the overall development of the police force.

In 1960-1961 a Police Commission headed by Justice B.G. Constantine and in

1969 another Police Commission headed by Major General A.O. Mitha had

been formed. However, no recommendations submitted by these two

committees were implemented.

The then DIG of Dhaka Range became the IGP of British India. The first

Bengali IGP was Mr. Zakir Hossain. However, the police force of Pakistan

continued the system of British period. Police were compelled to carry out

unpopular orders. The act of shooting on the participants of language

movement demonstration in 1952 was a perfect example of colonial rule and

suppression. The philosophy of police of the British regime had never been

complementary to democratic values and political development - "The

philosophy which we have inherited from the British rule is a peculiar blend of

colonial practices and magnanimous heritage of the British regime. It involves

subordination to the rule of law and popular accountability, on the one hand,

and passive relations between police and public except in times of emergency,

both personal and public, on the other hand." (Police and Political

Development in India, D.H. Bailey). Although Police is considered the main

driving force of law, it is never allowed to play the central role of traditional

criminal justice procedure.

The basic truth is that police is made to revolve around the principles of

14


15/61

imperial power in the sub-continent. There were a lot of changes in police

structure but no qualitative changes in the function of police - "Indian police

history can be seen as the expansion and contraction of an imperial power-

always set upon an impermeable stratum of village institutions. Structure came

and went, but there was no qualitative evolution from one imperial high-point

to another. In terms of ensuring the security of life and property, the imperial

agents of law and order played the more important role. Village policing was

essentially a self-regulatory mechanism closely tied to the internal power

structure of village society." (Police and Political Development in India, D.H.

Bailey). Therefore, this fact has to be considered while explaining the

relationship between police and public in Bangladesh. There had not been any

changes of this philosophy during the Pakistan Period.

Post Independence Period (1971 to the date)

The most glorious chapter of the history of Bangladesh Police is that Bangla

speaking members of our police participated along with the citizens in our

Independence War. Many of the members of our police became martyrs

during this War of Liberation. Many police personnel embraced martyrdom on

25 March 1971 fighting bravely with mere .303 rifles against the Pakistani

invaders. The resistance by the Bengali members of police at Rajarbag is

basically the first chapter of armed struggles during our War of Independence.

This armed resistance was a clear indication to all that they had no other

alternative but to go for an armed struggle to achieve independence. Few of

the police personnel were assigned to maintain law and order right after

achieving the Independence. In 1972 the number of police was increased by

recruiting officers and staff of different ranks. Dhaka Metropolitan Police andArmed Police Battalion were raised in 1976. In 1977 a Committee was formed

on 'police training' headed by Retired IGP M.A. Kabir. However, the

recommendations of the Committee were not implemented. Twelve women

police were recruited in the Special Branch for the first time in 1974. Women

police were recruited for Dhaka Metropolitan Police in 1978. Police had

extensively been reformed in the early 1980s according to the

recommendations of Enam Committee and by the Administrative Reforms of

1984. Bangladesh was divided into 64 districts. The positions of the Circle

Inspector and the Officer-in-Charge were enhanced to ASP and Inspector

15


16/61

respectively. The number of police was also increased. In 1986 a Committee

was formed headed by Additional IGP Toieb Uddin Ahmed. The number of

police force was increased and the logistic supports for police were enhanced

as per the recommendations of this Committee. In 1988 another committeewas formed headed by Justice Aminul Islam. According to the

recommendations of this Committee the post of Additional IGP was created

and the number of different police units like police stations, investigation

centers and the number of police force were increased. Recently (in 2004)

Rapid Action Battalions have been raised comprising the members of Armed

Forces, Police, BDR and Ansars. The dresses of police have been changed

according to The Dress Rules, 2004. With this the century-old emblem of

police came to an end. At present the number of police force in Bangladesh isaround 1,17,000 (June 2006).

The British colonial heritage is still very often reflected in the administrative

structures, behaviours, laws and regulations of the police forces of

Bangladesh. Trace of this inherited colonial heritage is also to be found in the

criminal justice systems of our country. The Police Act,1861 and the revised

The Police Act , 1902-1903 are effective till the date. The non-military nature

of this Act and the accountability of police to civil administration have not

been changed. The history and heritage of Bangladesh Police is marked by the

blend of the traits of colonial- imperial rule and the system of internal security

of a feudal society. A policeman of an independent country should be a

craftsman in uniform who will be a social regulator directed by the laws of the

country and a custodian of social discipline. It is the expectations of all that

the hopes and inspirations of the population should be reflected in the

activities of police.

Throughout the history of civilization, societies have sought protection fortheir members and possessions. In early civilizations, members of one's family

provided this protection. Richard Lundman has suggested that the

development of formal policing resulted from a process of three

developmental stages. The first stage involves informal policing, where all

members of a society share equally in the responsibility for providing

protection and keeping order. The second stage, transitional policing, occurs

when police functions are informally assigned to particular members of the

society. This stage serves as a transition into formal policing, where specific

16


17/61

members of the community assume formal responsibility for protection and

social control. Lundman suggests that the history of police involved a shift

from informal to formal policing. Indeed, as societies have evolved from

mechanical (members share similar beliefs and values but meet their basic

needs independently) to organic (members are dependent upon one another as

a result of specialization) societies, social control became more complex.

Whereas there was little need for formal, specialized policing in mechanical

societies, organic societies require more specialization to ensure public order.

Over time, organic societies developed into states and governments. Astate is

defined as "a political creation that has the recognized authority to use and

maintain a monopoly on the use of force within a clearly defined jurisdiction,"

while agovernmentis a "political institution of the state that uses organization,

bureaucracy, and formality to regulate social interactions" (Gaines et al., p. 1).

The origins of formal policing began with the organization of societies into

states and governments.

The form of government heavily influences the structure of police

organizations. As Lang-worthy and Travis have argued, "since all police

systems rely on state authority, the source of state power ultimately represents

the basis of police authority as well" (p. 42). Different forms of government

have established different types of police forces. Shelley suggests that there

are four different models of policing (i.e., communist, Anglo-Saxon,

continental, and colonial) that differ based on their sources of legitimacy,

organizational structure, and police function. The present author suggests that

the communist model of policing obtains legitimacy through the communist

political party, is organized as a centralized, armed militarized force, and

performs the functions of crime control and enforcement of state ideology.The continental and colonial models have similar organizational structures and

functions as the communist model, however the continental model obtains its

legitimacy through the central government while the colonial model

establishes legitimacy through the colonial authority. In comparison, the

Anglo-Saxon model obtains legitimacy through local governments and is

based in law. This model is organized as a decentralized force that is armed in

some countries (United States) and not in others (England). Finally, police

17


18/61

functions in this model include crime control, order maintenance, and welfare

and administrative responsibilities.

In this entry, a historical description of the Anglo-Saxon model of policing is

presented. The changes in the mission, strategies, and organizational structures

of policing through different time periods are examined. A particular emphasis

is placed on the historical roots of policing in England and their influence on

modern policing in America. This entry will also detail the changes of

American police forces since their establishment in the 1800s as organizations

of social control. Current debate about recent changes in the mission,

strategies, and organizational structures of police will be described and the

future of police organizations will be examined.

CASES

Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961).

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).

Until the mid-1800s, law enforcement in England was a local responsibility of

citizens. From 1066 (invasion and conquering of England by William Duke of

Normandy) to the 1300s, police services were provided through the

frankpledge system. Under this system, citizens were appointed with the

responsibility of maintaining order and controlling crime. Men were formed

into groups of ten, called a tythi

Three names are generally associated with the development of the first modern

police forces in EnglandHenry Fielding, Patrick Colquhoun, and Sir Robert

Peel. Henry Fielding was a playwright and novelist who accepted a position asmagistrate deputy of Bow Street Court in 1748. He is credited with two major

contributions to the field of policing (Gaines et al.). First, Fielding advocated

cha

The development of law enforcement in colonial America was similar to that

of England during the same time period. Law enforcement in colonial America

was considered a local responsibility. As in England, the colonies established

a system of night watch to guard cities against fire, crime, and disorder. In

18


19/61

addition to night watch systems, there were sheriffs appointed by the governor

and constable

The first modern police forces in America borrowed heavily from those

established in England. In particular, American law enforcement agencies

adopted the mission of crime prevention and control, the strategy of preventive

patrol, and the quasi-military organizational design of the first modern police

department established in London. In addition to these three elements,

American policing borrowed

As previously noted, American policing in the late nineteenth century was

plagued with political influence. Local politicians used positions on the police

force to reward their supporters after election. Therefore the ethnic and

religious composition of police forces often reflected the groups who had local

political influence. In addition, positions and promotions on local police forces

could be

Police in America changed dramatically during the twentieth century.

According to Walker (1999), three principle forces were underlying this

change: the police professionalism movement, modern technologies, and the

civil rights movement. Other scholars suggest that police reform was the result

of investigative commissions, reform initiated by police administrators, and

political reform in general

Conclusion: The 1960s were a period characterized by much civil unrest.

Citizens were dissatisfied with the social and political conditions, and

particularly with the treatment of minorities. During this time, the U.S.

Supreme Court decided a series of landmark cases that limited the

investigative techniques used by police officers. For example, the court

decided in Mapp v. Ohio (367 U.S. 643 (1961)), that ev

The 1960s police-citizen crisis, coupled with research findings from the 1970s,

questioned the core philosophies underlying policing in America. In a seminal

article on policing, Wilson and Kelling proposed the broken windows thesis.

They argued that a broken window in an abandoned building or car is a

symbol that no one cares about the property, making it ripe for criminal

activity. Wilson and Ke

19


20/61

National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. Report of the National

Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Government Printing Office, 1968. "'Broken Windows' and Fractured History:

The Use and Misuse of History in Recent Police Patrol Analysis." Justice

Quarterly 1, no. 1 (1984): 7590. . The Police i

20


21/61

CHAPTER-III

Role of Police

Filing FIR

Section 154 of the code of criminal procedure 1898 says that, Every

information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence if given orally

to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or

under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such

information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall

be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in

a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the Government may

prescribe in this behalf.

Section 155 of CrPC says that, (1) When information is given to an

officer in charge of police-station of the commission within the

limits of such station of a no cognizable offence, he shall enter in a

book to be kept as aforesaid the substance of such Information and

refer the informant to the Magistrate.

(2) Investigation into non-cognizable cases. No police-officer shallinvestigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a magistrate of the first

or second class having power to try such case or send the same for trial.

(3) Any police-officer receiving such order may exercise the

same powers in respect of the investigation (except the power to arrest without

warrant) as an officer in charge of a police station may exercise in a

cognizable case.

Arresting the offender

1. Arrest with warrant

Section 46 of the CrPC (1) in making an arrest the Police-officer or otherperson making the same shall actually touch or confine the body of the person

to be arrested, unless there be a submission to the custody byword or action.

(2) Resisting endeavour to arrest.- If such person forcibly resists the

endeavor to arrest him, or attempts to evade the arrest, such Police-officer or

21


22/61

other person may use all means necessary to effect the arrest.

(3) Nothing in this section gives a right to cause the death of a person who

is not accused of an offence punishable with death or with transportation for

life.

Section 47 of the CrPCentered by person sought to be arrested. If any person

acting under a warrant of arrest, or any police-officer having authority to

arrest, has reason to believe that the person to be arrested has entered into, or

is within, any place, the person residing in or being in charge of, such place

shall, on demand of such person acting as aforesaid or such police-officer,

allow him free ingress thereto, and afford all reasonable facilities for a searchtherein.

Section 48 of the CrPC says that If ingress to such place cannot be obtained

under section 47 it shall be lawful in any case for a person acting under a

warrant and in any case in which a warrant may issue, but cannot be obtained

without affording the person to be arrested an opportunity of escape, for a

Police-officer to enter such place and search therein, and in order to effect and

entrance into such place, to break open any outer or inner door or window of

any house or place, whether that of the person to be arrested or of any other

person, if after notification of his authority and purpose, and demand of

admittance duly made, he cannot otherwise obtain admittance:

Breaking open zanana.- Provided that, if any such place is an

apartment in the actual occupancy of a woman (not being the person to be

arrested) who, according to custom, does not appear in public such person or

police-officer shall, before entering such apartment give notice to such women

that she is at liberty to withdraw and shall afford her every reasonable facility

for withdrawing and may then break open the apartment and enter into it.

Section 49 of the CrPC says that, any police-officer or other person authorized

to make an arrest may break open any outer or inner door or window of any

house or place in order to liberate himself or any other person who, having

lawfully entered for the purpose of making an arrest, is detained therein.

22


23/61

Section 50 of the CrPC says that, the person arrested shall not be subjected to

more restraint than is necessary to prevent his escape.

Section 51 of the CrPC says that, whenever a person is arrested by a police

officer under a warrant which does not provide for the taking bail, or under a

warrant which provides for the taking of bail but the person arrested cannot

furnish bail, and

Whenever a person is arrested without warrant, or by a private person under a

warrant, and cannot legally be admitted to bail or is ~ab1e to furnish bail.

The officer making the arrest or, when the arrest is made by person, the police-

officer to whom he makes over the person arrested, may search such person,

and place in safe custody all articles, other than necessary wearing-apparel,

found upon him.

Section 52 of the CrPC says that whenever it is necessary to cause a woman to

be searched, the search shall be made by another woman, with strict regard to

decency.

Section 53 of the CrPC says that, the officer or other person making any arrest

under this Code may take from the person arrested any offensive weapons

which he had about his person, and shall deliver all weapons so taken to the

Court or officer before which or whom the officer or person making the arrest

is required by this Code to produce the person arrested.

2. Arrest without warrant:

Section 54 of the CrPC says that, (1) any police-officer may, without an order

from a Magistrate and without a warrant, arrest

Firstly, any person who has been concerned in any cognizable offence or

against whom a reasonable complaint has been made or credible information

has been received or a reasonable suspicion exists of his having been so

concerned;

23


24/61

Secondly, any person having in his possession without lawful excuse, the

burden of proving which excuse shall lie on such person, any implement of

house-breaking;

Thirdly, any person who has been proclaimed as an offender either this Code

or by order of the Government;

Fourthly, any person in whose possession anything is found which may

reasonably be suspected to be stolen property and who may reasonably be

suspected of having committed an offence with reference to such thing;

Fifthly, any person who obstructs a Police-officer while in the execution of hisduty, or who has escaped, or attempts to escape, from lawful custody,

Sixthly, any person reasonably suspected of being a deserter from the armed

forces of Bangladesh;

Seventhly, any person who has been concerned in, or against whom areasonable complaint has been made or credible information has been received

or a reasonable suspicion exists of his having been concerned in, any act

committed at any place out of Bangladesh, which, if committed in Bangladesh,

would have been punishable as an offence, and for which he is, under any law

relating to extradition or under the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, or otherwise,

liable to be apprehended or detained in custody in Bangladesh;

Eighthly, any released convict committing a breach of any rule made under

section 565, sub-section (3);

Ninthly, any person for whose arrest a requisition has been received from

another police-officer, provided that the requisition specified the person to be

arrested and the offence or other cause for which the arrest is to be made and it

appears there from that the person might lawfully be arrested without a

warrant by the officer who issued the requisition.

Abuse of power under sections 54 and 167 by the police and Magistrates have

been elaborately discussed by the High Court Division of the Supreme Court

24


25/61

in BLAST v Bangladesh (55 DLR 363). In this case the H(D has given 15directives to the Government to follow along with recommendations to

implement by way of amending the Cr.PC Of these 15 directions first 8 relates

to the police power of arrest under section 54 of the Cr.PC which are as

follows:

(1) No police officer shall arrest a person under section 54 of the Code for the

purpose of detaining him under section 3 of the Special Powers Act, 1974.

(2) A police officer shall disclose his identity and, if demanded, shall show his

identity card to the person arrested and to the persons present at the time of

arrest.

(3) Immediately after bringing the person arrested to the police station, the

police officer shall record the reasons for the arrest including the knowledge

which he has about the involvement of the person in a cognizable offence,

particulars of the offence, circumstances under which arrest was made, the

source of information and the reasons for believing the information,

description of the place, note the date and time of arrest, name and address of

the persons, if any, present at the time of arrest in a diary kept in the police

station for that purpose.

(4) If at the time of arrest, the police officer finds any marks of injury on the

person arrested, he shall record the reasons for such injury and shall take the

person to the nearest hospital or Government doctor for treatment and shall

obtain a certificate from the attending doctor about the injuries.

5) He shall furnish the reasons for arrest to the person arrested within three

hours of bringing him to the police station.

(6) If the person is not arrested from his residence or place of business, he

shall inform the nearest relation of the person over phone, if any, or through a

messenger within one hour of bringing him to the police station.

(7) He shall allow the person arrested to consult the lawyer of his choice if he

so desires or to meet any of his nearest relations.

25


26/61

(8) When such person is produced before the nearest Magistrate under section

61, the police officer shall state in his forwarding letter under section 167(1) if

the Code as to why the investigation could not be completed within 24 hours,

why he considers that the accusation or the information against that person is

well-founded. He shall also transmit copy of the relevant entries in the case

diary BP form 38 to the same Magistrate.

Section 55 of the CrPC says that, (1) Any officer in charge of a police-station

may, in like manner, arrest or cause to be arrested

(a) any person found taking precautions to conceal his presence within the

limits of such station, under circumstances which afford reason to believe that

he is taking such precautions with a view to committing a cognizable offence;or

(b) any person within the limits of such station who has no ostensible

means of subsistence, or who cannot give a satisfactory account of himself; or

(c) any person who is by repute an habitual robber, housebreaker or thief,

or an habitual receiver of stolen property knowing it to be stolen or who by

repute habitually commits extortion or in order to the committing of extortion

habitually puts or attempts to put persons in fear of injury

Section 56 of the CrPC says that, when any officer in Charge of a police

station or any police-officer making an investigation under Chapter (XIV

requires any officer sub ordinate to him to arrest without a warrant (otherwise

than in his presence) any person who may lawfully be arrested without a

warrant, he shall deliver to the officer required to make the arrest an order in

writing, specifying the person to be arrested and the offence or other cause for

which the arrest is to be made. The officer so required shall, before making the

arrest, notify to the person to be arrested the substance of the order and, if so

required by such person shall show him the order.

Section 57 of the CrPC says that, (1) When any person who in the presence of

a police-officer has committed or has been accused of committing a non-

cognizable offence refuses, on demand of such officer, to give his name and

residence or gives a name or residence which such officer has reason to

believe to be false, he may be arrested by such officer in order that his name or

26


27/61

residence may be ascertained.

(2) When the true name and residence of such person have been ascertained,

he shall be released on his executing a bond, with or without sureties, to

appear before a Magistrate if so required:

Provided that, if such person is not resident in Bangladesh, the bond

shall be secured by a surety or sureties resident in Bangladesh.

(3) Should the true name and residence of such person not be ascertained

within twenty four hours from the time of arrest or should he fail to execute

the bond, or if so required, to furnish sufficed sureties, he shall forthwith be

forwarded to the nearest Magistrate having jurisdiction.

Placing the offender before magistrate

Section 61 of the CrPC says that no police-officer shall detain in custody a

person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the

circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the

absence of a special order of a Magistrate under section 167, exceed twenty-

four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of

arrest to the Magistrates Court.

Power of taking offender in remand

Section 167 of the CrPC says that,

(1) Whenever any person is arrested and detained in custody, and it appears

that the investigation cannot be completed within the period of twenty four

hours fixed by section 61, and there are grounds for believing that the

accusation or information is well-founded, the officer-in-charge of the police

station or the police officer making the investigation if he is not below the

rank of sub-inspector shall forthwith transmit to the [nearest Judicial

Magistrate] a copy of the entries in the diary hereinafter prescribed relating to

the case, and shall at the same time forward the accused to such Magistrate.

(2) The Magistrate to whom an accused person is forwarded under this section

may, whether he has or has not jurisdiction to try the case from time to time

authorize the detention of the accused in such custody as such Magistrate

27


28/61

thinks fit, for a term not exceeding fifteen days in the whole. If he has not

jurisdiction to try the case or send it for trial, and considers further detention

unnecessary, he may order the accused to be forwarded to a Magistrate having

such jurisdiction.

Provided that no Magistrate of the third class, and no Magistrate of the

second class not specially empowered in this behalf by the Government shall

authorise detention in the custody of the police.

(3) A Magistrate authorizing under this section detention in the custody of the

police shall record his reasons for so doing.

(4) 1f such order is given by a Magistrate other than the Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate or the Chief Judicial Magistrate, he shall forward a copy of his

order, with his reasons for making into the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or to

the Chief Judicial Magistrate to whom he is subordinate.

(4A) If such order is given by a Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or a Chief

Judicial Magistrate, he shall forward a copy of his order, with reasons for

making it to the Metropolitan Sessions Judge or to the Sessions Judge to

whom he is subordinate.

(5) If the investigation is not concluded within one hundred and twenty days

from the date of receipt of the information relating to the commission of the

offence or the order of the Magistrate for such Investigation,-

(a) the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of such offence or making

the order for investigation may, if the offence to which the investigation

relates is not punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment

exceeding ten years, release the accused on bail to the satisfaction of such

Magistrate; and

(b) the Court of Session may, if the offence to which the investigation

relates is punishable with death imprisonment for life or imprisonment


Court;

Provided that if an accused is not released on bail under this sub-

section, the Magistrate, or as the case may be, the Court of Session shall

28


29/61

record the reasons for it:

Provided further that iii cases in which sanction of appropriate

authority is required to be obtained under the provisions of the relevant law for

prosecution of the accused, the time taken for detaining such sanction shall be

excluded from the period specified in this sub-section.

Explanation.- The time taken for obtaining sanction shall commence from the

day the case, with all necessary documents, is submitted for consideration of

the appropriate authority and be deemed to end on the day of the receipt of the

sanction order of the authority.

(8) The provisions of sub-section (5) shall not apply to the investigation ofan offence under section 400 or section 401 of the Penal Code, 1860 (Act

XLV of 1860).

Process of Investigation regarding cognizable and non-cognizable

offences:

Section 154 of the code of criminal procedure 1898 says that, Every

information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence if given orally

to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or

under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such

information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall

be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in

a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the Government may

prescribe in this behalf.

Section 155 of CrPC says that, (1) When information is given to an

officer in charge of police-station of the commission within the

limits of such station of a no cognizable offence, he shall enter in a

book to be kept as aforesaid the substance of such Information and

refer the informant to the Magistrate.

(2) Investigation into non-cognizable cases. No police-officer shall

investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a magistrate of the first

or second class having power to try such case or send the same for trial.

29


30/61

(3) Any police-officer receiving such order may exercise the

same powers in respect of the investigation (except the power to arrest without

warrant) as an officer in charge of a police station may exercise in a

cognizable case.

Section 156 of the CrPC says that, (1) Any officer-in-charge of a police-

station may, without the order of a Magistrate, investigate any cognizable case

which a Court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such

station would have power to inquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter

XV relating to the place of inquiry or trial.

(2) No proceeding of a police-officer in any such case shall at any

stage be called in question on the ground that the case was one which suchofficer was not empowered under this section to investigate.

(3) Any Magistrate empowered under section 190 may order such an

investigation as above-mentioned.


(1) If, from information received or otherwise, an officer in charge of a

police-station has reason to suspect the commission of an offence which he is

empowered under section 156 to investigate, he shall forthwith send a report

of the same to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of such offence

upon a police-report, and shall proceed in person, or shall depute one of his

subordinate officers not being below such rank as the Government may, by

general or special order, prescribe in this behalf to proceed, to the spot, to

investigate the facts and circumstances of the case, and, ifnecessary, to take

measures for the discovery and arrest of the offender:

Provided as follows:-

(a) Where local investigation dispensed with.- When any information as to

the commission of any such offence is given against any person by name and

the case is not of a serious nature, the officer-in-charge of a police-station need

not proceed in person or depute a subordinate officer to make an investigation

on the spot;

(b) Where police officer in charge sees no sufficient ground for

investigation.- If it appears to the officer-in-charge of a police-station that

there is no sufficient ground for entering on an investigation, he shall not

30


31/61

investigate the case.

(2) In each of the cases mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of the

proviso the sub-section (1), the officer in charge of the police-station shall

state in his said report his reasons for not fully complying with the

requirements of that sub-section, and in the case mentioned in clause (b), such

officer shall also forthwith notify to the informant, if any, in such manner as

may be prescribed by the Government, the fact that he will not investigate the

case or cause it to be investigated.


(1) Every report sent to a Magistrate under section 157 shall, if theGovernment so directs, be submitted through such superior officer of police as

the Government, by general or special order, appoints in that behalf.

(2) Such superior officer may give such instructions to the officer-in-

charge of the police-station as he thinks fit, and shall, after recording such

instructions on such report, transmit the same without delay to Magistrate.

Section 159 of the CrPC says that, such Magistrate, on receiving such report,

may direct an investigation, or if he thinks fit at once proceed, or depute any

Magistrate subordinate to him to proceed, to hold a preliminary inquiry into,

or otherwise to dispose of, the case in manner provided in this Code.

Section 160 of the CrPC says that, any police-officer making an investigation

under this Chapter may, by order in writing, require the attendance before

himself of any person being within the limits of his own or any adjoining

station who, from the information given or otherwise, appears to be acquainted

with the circumstances of the case; and such person shall attend as so required.


(1) Any police-officer making an investigation under this

Chapter or any police-officer not below such rank as the Government may, by

general or special order, prescribe in this behalf, acting on the requisition of

such officer may examine orally any person supposed to be acquainted with

31


32/61

the facts and circumstances of the case.

(2) Such person shall be bound to answer all questions relating to such

case put to him by such officer, other than questions the answers to which

would have a tendency to expose him to a criminal charge or to a penalty or

forfeiture.

(3)The police-officer may reduce into writing any statement made to

him in the course of an examination under this section, and if he does so he

shall make a separate record of the statement, of each such persons whose

statement he records.

Section 162 of the CrPC says that, (1) No statement made by any person to a

police officer in the course of an investigation under this Chapter shall, if

reduced into writing, be signed by the person making it; nor shall any such

statement or any record thereof, whether in a police-diary or otherwise, or any

part of such statement or record, be used for any purpose (save as hereinafter

provided) at any inquiry or trial in respect of any offence under investigation

at the time when such statement was made:

Provided that, when any witness is called for the prosecution in such

inquiry or trial whose statement has been reduced into writing as aforesaid, the

Court shall on the request of the accused, refer to such writing and direct that

the accused be furnished with a copy thereof, in order that any part of such

statement, if duly proved, may be used to contradict such witness in the

manner provided by section 145 of the Evidence Act, 1872. When any part of

such statement is so used, any part thereof may also be used in the re-

examination such witness, but for the purpose only of explaining any matter

referred to in his cross-examination:

Provided, further that, if the Court is of opinion that any part of any

such statement is not relevant to the subject-matter of the inquiry or trial or

that its disclosure to the accused is not essential in the interests of justice and

is inexpedient in the public interests, it shall record such opinion (but not the

reasons therefore) and shall exclude such part from the copy of the statement

furnished to the accused.

32


33/61

(2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to apply to any

statement falling within the provisions of section 32, clause (1), of the

Evidence Act, 1872 or to affect the provisions of section 27 of that Act.

Section 163 of the CrPC says that, (1) No police-officer or other person in

authority shall offer or make, or cause to be offered or made any such

inducement, threat or promise as is mentioned in the Evidence Act, 1872,

section 24.

(2) But no police-officer or other person shall prevent, by any caution or

otherwise, any person from making in the course of any investigation underthis Chapter any statement which he may be disposed to make of his own free

will.

Section 164 of the CrPC says that, (1) Any Metropolitan Magistrate, any

Magistrate of the first class and any Magistrate of the second class specially

empowered in this behalf by the Government may, if he is not a police-officer

record any statement or confession made to him in the course of an

investigation under this Chapter or at any time afterwards before the

commencement of the inquiry or trial.

(2) Such statements shall be recorded in such of the manners

hereinafter prescribed for recording evidence as is, in his opinion best fitted

for the circumstances of the case. Such confessions shall be recorded and

signed in the manner provided in section 364, and such statements or

confessions shall then be forwarded to the Magistrate by whom the case is to

be inquired into or tried.

(3) A Magistrate shall, before recording any such confession

explain to the person making it that he is not bound to make a confession and

that if he does so it may be used as evidence against him and no Magistrate

shall record any such confession unless, upon questioning the person making

it, he has reason to believe that it was made voluntarily and, when he records

any confession, he shall make a memorandum at the foot of such record to the

33


34/61

following effect:

I have explained to (name) that he is not bound to make a confession and that

if he does so, any confession he may make may be used as evidence against

him and I believe that this confession was voluntarily made. It was taken in

my presence and hearing, and was read over to the person making it and

admitted by him to be correct, and it contains a full and true account of the

statement made by him.

Explanation.- It is not necessary that the Magistrate receiving and recording a

confession or statement should be a Magistrate having jurisdiction in the case.

Section 165 of the CrPC says that, (1) Whenever an officer in-charge of a

police station or a police-officer making an investigation has reasonable

grounds for believing that anything necessary for the purposes of an

investigation into any offence which is authorised to investigate may be found

in any place within the limits of the police-station of which he is charge or to

which he is attached, and that such thing cannot in his opinion be otherwise

obtained without undue delay, such officer may, after recording in writing the

grounds of his belief and specifying in such writing, so far as possible, the

thing for which search is to be made, search, or cause search to be made, for

such thing in anyplace within the limits of such station.

Provided that no such officer shall search or cause search to be made, for

anything which is in the custody of a bank or banker as defined in the

Bankers Books Evidence Act, 1891 (XVIII of 1891), and relates, or might

disclose any information which relates, to the bank account of any person

except:

(a) For the purpose of investigating an offence under sections 403, 406, 408

and 409 and sections 421 to 424 both inclusive and sections 465 to 477A (both

inclusive) of the Penal Code with the prior permission in writing of a Sessions

Judge; and

(b) in other cases, with the prior permission in writing of the High Court

Division.

(2) A police-officer proceeding under sub-section (1) shall if practicable,

34


35/61

conduct the search in person.

(3) If he is unable to conduct the search in person, and there is no other

person competent to make the search present at the time, he may after

recording in writing his reasons for so doing require any officer subordinate to

him to make the search, and he shall deliver to such subordinate officer an

order in writing specifying the place to be searched and, so far as possible, the

thing for which search is to be made; and such subordinate officer may

thereupon search for such thing in such place.

(4) The provisions of this Code as to search-warrants and the general

provisions as to searches contained in section 102 and section 103 shall, so faras may apply to a search made under this section.

(5) Copies of any record made under sub-section (1) or subsection (3)

shall forthwith be sent to the nearest Magistrate empowered to take

cognizance of the office and the owner or occupier of the place searched shall

on application be furnished with a copy of the same by the Magistrate.

Provided that he shall pay for the same unless the Magistrate for some special

reason thinks fit to furnish it free of cost.

Section 166. of the CrPC says that, (1) An officer-in-charge of a

police-station or a police-officer not being below the rank of sub-

inspector making an investigation may require an officer-in-charge

of another police-station, whether in the same or a different district,

to cause a search to be made in any place, in any case in which the

former officer might cause such search to be made, within the

limits of his own station.

(2) Such officer, on being so required, shall proceed according to the

provisions of section 165, and shall forward the thing found, if any, to the

officer at whose request the search was made.

35


36/61

(3)Whenever there is reason to believe that the delay occasioned by

requiring an officer-in-charge of another police-stations to cause a search to be

made sub-section (1) might result in evidence of the commission of an offence

being concealed or destroyed, it shall be lawful for an officer in charge of a

police-station or a police-officer making an investigation under this Chapter to

search, or cause to be searched, any place in the limits of another police-

station, in accordance with the provisions of section 165, as if such place were

within the limits of his own station.

(4) Any officer conducting a search under sub-section (3) shall

forthwith send notice of the search to the officer-in-charge of the police-

station within the limits of which such place is situated, and shall also sendwith such notice a copy of the limit (if any prepared under section 103, and

shall also send to the nearest Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the

offence copies of the records referred to in section 165, sub-section (1) and

(3).

(5) The owner or occupier of the place searched shall, on application, be

furnished with a copy of any record sent to the Magistrate under sub-section

(4).

Provided that he shall pay for the same unless the Magistrate for some

special reason thinks fit to furnish it free of cost.


(1) Whenever any person is arrested and detained in custody, and it appears

that the investigation cannot be completed within the period of twenty four

hours fixed by section 61, and there are grounds for believing that the

accusation or information is well-founded, the officer-in-charge of the police

station or the police officer making the investigation if he is not below the

rank of sub-inspector shall forthwith transmit to the 70[nearest Judicial

Magistrate] a copy of the entries in the diary hereinafter prescribed relating to

the case, and shall at the same time forward the accused to such Magistrate.

(2) The Magistrate to whom an accused person is forwarded under this section

36


37/61

may, whether he has or has not jurisdiction to try the case from time to time

authorize the detention of the accused in such custody as such Magistrate

thinks fit, for a term not exceeding fifteen days in the whole. If he has not

jurisdiction to try the case or send it for trial, and considers further detention

unnecessary, he may order the accused to be forwarded to a Magistrate having

such jurisdiction.

Provided that no Magistrate of the third class, and no Magistrate of the

second class not specially empowered in this behalf by the Government shall

authorise detention in the custody of the police.

(3) A Magistrate authorizing under this section detention in the custody of thepolice shall record his reasons for so doing.

(4) 1f such order is given by a Magistrate other than the Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate or the Chief Judicial Magistrate, he shall forward a copy of his

order, with his reasons for making into the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or to

the Chief Judicial Magistrate to whom he is subordinate.

(4A) If such order is given by a Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or a Chief

Judicial Magistrate, he shall forward a copy of his order, with reasons for

making it to the Metropolitan Sessions Judge or to the Sessions Judge to

whom he is subordinate.

(5) If the investigation is not concluded within one hundred and twenty days

from the date of receipt of the information relating to the commission of the

offence or the order of the Magistrate for such Investigation,-

(a) the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of such offence or making

the order for investigation may, if the offence to which the investigation

relates is not punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment


Magistrate; and

(b) the Court of Session may, if the offence to which the investigation

relates is punishable with death imprisonment for life or imprisonment


37


38/61

Court;

Provided that if an accused is not released on bail under this sub-

section, the Magistrate, or as the case may be, the Court of Session shall

record the reasons for it:

Provided further that iii cases in which sanction of appropriate

authority is required to be obtained under the provisions of the relevant law for

prosecution of the accused, the time taken for detaining such sanction shall be

excluded from the period specified in this sub-section.

Explanation.- The time taken for obtaining sanction shall commence from the

day the case, with all necessary documents, is submitted for consideration of

the appropriate authority and be deemed to end on the day of the receipt of thesanction order of the authority.

(8) The provisions of sub-section (5) shall not apply to the investigation of

an offence under section 400 or section 401 of the Penal Code, 1860 (Act

XLV of 1860).

Abuse of power under sections 54 and 167 by the police and Magistrates have

been elaborately discussed by the High Court Division of the Supreme Court

in BLAST v Bangladesh (55 DLR 363). In this case the H(D has given 15directives to the Government to follow along with recommendations to

implement by way of amending the Cr.PC Of these 15 directions first 8 relates

to the police power of arrest under section 54 of the Cr.PC which are as

follows:

(1) No police officer shall arrest a person under section 54 of the Code for the

purpose of detaining him under section 3 of the Special Powers Act, 1974.

(2) A police officer shall disclose his identity and, if demanded, shall show his

identity card to the person arrested and to the persons present at the time of

arrest.

(3) Immediately after bringing the person arrested to the police station, the

police officer shall record the reasons for the arrest including the knowledge

which he has about the involvement of the person in a cognizable offence,

particulars of the offence, circumstances under which arrest was made, the

38


39/61

source of information and the reasons for believing the information,

description of the place, note the date and time of arrest, name and address of

the persons, if any, present at the time of arrest in a diary kept in the police

station for that purpose.

(4) If at the time of arrest, the police officer finds any marks of injury on the

person arrested, he shall record the reasons for such injury and shall take the

person to the nearest hospital or Government doctor for treatment and shall

obtain a certificate from the attending doctor about the injuries.

5) He shall furnish the reasons for arrest to the person arrested within three

hours of bringing him to the police station.(6) If the person is not arrested from his residence or place of business, he

shall inform the nearest relation of the person over phone, if any, or through a

messenger within one hour of bringing him to the police station.

(7) He shall allow the person arrested to consult the lawyer of his choice if he

so desires or to meet any of his nearest relations.

(8) When such person is produced before the nearest Magistrate under section

61, the police officer shall state in his forwarding letter under section 167(1) if

the Code as to why the investigation could not be completed within 24 hours,

why he considers that the accusation or the information against that person is

well-founded. He shall also transmit copy of the relevant entries in the case

diary BP form 38 to the same Magistrate.

Section I68 of the CrPC says that,

When any subordinate Police-officer has made any investigation under this

Chapter, he shall report the result of such investigation to the Officer-in-

Charge of the police-station.

Section 169 of the CrPC says that, if, upon an investigation under this

Chapter, it appears to the officer-in-Charge of the police-station or to the

police-officer making the investigation that there is no sufficient evidence or

reasonable ground of suspicion

non-party caretaker govt

Documents