Investigation
When none of accused persons of a case is arrested and detained in custody, none of the provisions of sub-sections (5), (6), (7) and (7A) of section 167 Cr.P.C. is attracted. Md. Rafiqul Islam Vs. The State, 14 BLD (HCD) 409
Investigation
Under section 166(3) Cr.P.C a police officer investigating a case is authorised to search any place in the limits of another police station if he has reason to believe that delay in making the search might result in the evidence of commission of the offence being concealed or destroyed. S. 166 (3) Kamruzzaman alias Babul Sikdar Vs. The State, 15BLD (HCD) 486 Ref: AIR. 1955 (Cal) 129; 44 DLR 159; 8 B.L.D. 412 Cited
Investigation
The purpose for the fixation of the period of investigation is for speedy trial of the case to save the accused from unnecessary harassment in jail custody by prolonging investigation. But this provision is directory and not mandatory. On the expiry of the period for investigation the accused cannot therefore claim bail as a matter of right-Cr.P/C, S. 167(5) Md. Anwar Hossain Vs. The State, 15BLD(HCD)101
Investigation Before repeal by Act 42 of 1992 sub- section (5) of Section 167 Cr.P.C. provided that the Magistrate shall make an order stop- ping further investigation, if investigation could not be concluded within the specified or extended time while sub-section (7) of section 167 Cr.P.C. provided that where further investigation into an offence was stopped on the expiry of specified or extended time, the ac- cused shall be released. Since in the instant case, none of the accused persons was in custody, there was no question of releasing the accused stopping further investigation. Kitab Ali Sikdar Vs. The state, 15BLD (HCD) 482
Investigation
With the amendment of section 167 Cr.P.C. by Act No. 42 of 1992, the time limit for conclusion of investigation has been done away with. After the amendment there is no legal difficulty with the police to continue with the investigation of a case and submit chargesheet. Government of Bangladesh Vs. Shah Alam, 15 BLD (AD)108
Investigation
The High Court Division took the view that for reviving a case under sub-section (7A) of section 167 Cr.P.C., the Magistrate was required to release the accused after further investigation was stopped under sub- section (5) of section 167 Cr.P.C. Such a view was not correct. The Appellate Division held that an order of revival can be passed even without releasing the accused. Government of Bangladesh Vs. Shah Alam, 15 BLD (AD)108
Investigation
High Court Division has been noticing repeatedly that the police does not investigate the case having regard to provision of section 167 of the Code which provides that if the police report is not submitted within certain stipulated period, the accused is entitled to bail and the Court cannot wait for police re- port for uncertain period but to act within the frame work of law and the Court is bound to release the accused on bail as mandated by law. The monitoring authority should be vigilant over investigating agency so that, the investigation is completed within the stipulated period. The judiciary one of the principal organs of the State has the responsibility to the citizens and it cannot allow the police for harping upon investigation for unlimited period and keep the accused behind the bar. Tarique Syed Mamun Vs. The State, 20BLD (HCD) 559
Investigation
By substituting the provision of section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure stopping further investigation for non- completion of investigation within the pre- scribed period and releasing of the accused therefor as was in the previous provision of section 167 (5) of the Code was deleted. So at a time when the report to prosecute the petitioner was submitted by the Assistant Inspector, Bureau of Anti-Corruption there was no provision in section 167 (5) of the Code for stopping investigation of a case and releasing the accused because of non-completion of investigation within the statutory period and as such the question of stopping of the investigation of the case in respect of the petitioner and relasing him does not arise at all. Sree Bimal Chandra Adikhari Vs The State, 19BLD (HCD) 282 Ref: PLD1955(Lahore)667; (1957) 9DLR 633 Cited
Investigation officers-
The investigation officers do not have any discretion to take decision as to whether he will or will not record the events during investigation in the case diary. This is a compulsory statutory duty for every officer to record all the events in the case diary. This is the duty of the Officer-in-Charge to make sure that officers subordinate to him shall record necessary entries in the case diary properly. A case diary is an indicator how good and intellectual a police officer is. ..... Ministry of Law, Justice & Parl. Afrs. VS BLAST, [3 LM (AD) 274]
"Inquiry" and "investigation"-The words 'inquiry' and 'investigation' are not words meant to bear the same connotations in the Code as well as in the Ain. They finally remain to be distinctly different in connotations to be taken recourse to by the Magistrate or the Tribunal according as the nature of a particular case, they respectively sit on, permits. Anjuara Khanam @ Anju vs State (Full Bench), 68 DLR 466
"Investigation"-Investigation being a process that follows its own rules must be allowed to go unhindered unless its goal is reached. What is important is not to squeeze a report within a deadline but constant vigilance by the supervisory authority to see whether the investigation is going in right order and in right pace and take drastic measures against the investi- gating officer should any laches, negli- gence or foulplay on his part is noticed. Anjuara Khanam @ Anju vs State (Full Bench), 68 DLR 466
