Criminal Procedure: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)
Police Report under the BNSS 2023 Section 193
Police Report under the BNSS, 2023: Section 193, Contents, Timelines, Charge Sheet and Closure Report, and Further Investigation
The police report is the document by which an investigation ends and a prosecution begins. It is the hinge of the criminal process: everything before it belongs to the police, everything after it belongs to the court, and the report is what transfers the case from one to the other. Section 2(1)(t) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 defines it as a report forwarded by a police officer to a Magistrate under sub-section (3) of section 193, and section 193 sets out what it must contain, when it must be sent, what must accompany it and what may be done afterwards.
Section 193 corresponds to section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and reproduces most of it. Four things are new, and each is characteristic of the Sanhita as a whole: the report may be forwarded by electronic communication, the informant or victim must be told of the progress of the investigation within ninety days, the report must state the sequence of custody of any electronic device, and further investigation during a trial is now time-bound.
1. The Anatomy of Section 193
Figure 1: Section 193 sub-section by sub-section
1.1 The duty to complete without delay, and the two-month rule
Sections 193(1) and 193(2), BNSS 2023 (1) Every investigation under this Chapter shall be completed without unnecessary delay. (2) The investigation in relation to an offence under sections 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70 and 71 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, or under sections 4, 6, 8 or 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, shall be completed within two months from the date on which the information was recorded by the officer in charge of the police station. |
Sub-section (1) states a general standard rather than a period, and it is not by itself enforceable by a fixed date. Sub-section (2) fixes one. The two-month period runs from the recording of the information, not from the arrest or from any later event, and it applies to the specified sexual offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and to the specified offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The provision carries forward what was section 173(1A) of the CrPC.
The Sanhita does not state what follows if the two months expire without the investigation being completed. The provision is therefore best understood as directory in its consequence and mandatory in its terms: it creates an obligation whose breach is a matter for departmental accountability and for the court’s supervision, and it does not by itself entitle the accused to any relief, though it is a circumstance the court may weigh on bail and on an application for default release under section 187.
1.2 The report and its contents
Under section 193(3)(i) the officer in charge, as soon as the investigation is completed, forwards to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence on a police report, including through electronic communication, a report in the form the State Government prescribes, stating the matters set out below.
Clause | What the report must state |
|---|---|
(a) | The names of the parties |
(b) | The nature of the information |
(c) | The names of the persons who appear to be acquainted with the circumstances of the case |
(d) | Whether any offence appears to have been committed and, if so, by whom |
(e) | Whether the accused has been arrested |
(f) | Whether the accused has been released on his bond or bail bond |
(g) | Whether the accused has been forwarded in custody under section 190 |
(h) | Whether the report of the medical examination of the woman has been attached, where the investigation relates to an offence under sections 64 to 68, 70 or 71 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 |
(i) | The sequence of custody in case of an electronic device |
Clause (i) has no counterpart in section 173 of the CrPC and is the most significant addition to the contents of the report. It requires the report to record the chain of custody of an electronic device from seizure onwards. The reason is evidentiary rather than procedural: the admissibility and the weight of electronic material depend on its integrity, and the commonest attack on such material at trial is that it may have been altered between seizure and production. A statutory requirement to record the sequence of custody in the report itself places the answer to that attack on the record from the outset.
1.3 The victim update and the action-taken communication
Sub-clause (ii) requires the police officer, within a period of ninety days, to inform the progress of the investigation by any means including through electronic communication to the informant or the victim. Sub-clause (iii) requires him also to communicate the action taken, in the manner State rules provide, to the person by whom the information was first given.
Neither duty existed under the CrPC. Together they change the position of the informant and the victim from persons who learn of the outcome when it arrives to persons entitled to be kept informed while the investigation is running. The obligation in sub-clause (ii) is not tied to the completion of the investigation: ninety days runs whether or not the investigation is finished, so a long investigation attracts the duty more than once in substance, though the section fixes only the first period.
1.4 What accompanies the report
Section 193(6) requires the officer, where the case is one to which section 190 applies, to forward with the report all documents or relevant extracts on which the prosecution proposes to rely, other than those already sent during investigation, and the statements recorded under section 180 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses.
Section 193(7) permits the officer to withhold a part of such a statement. Where he is of opinion that a part is not relevant to the subject matter of the proceedings, or that its disclosure to the accused is not essential in the interests of justice and is inexpedient in the public interest, he indicates that part, appends a note requesting the Magistrate to exclude it from the copies granted to the accused, and states his reasons. The decision is the Magistrate’s, not the officer’s: the section confers a power to request, not a power to withhold.
Section 193(8) requires the officer to submit copies of the police report with the other documents duly indexed, for supply to the accused under section 230. A proviso adds that supply of the report and other documents by electronic communication shall be considered as duly served. Read with section 230, which requires supply within fourteen days and to the victim as well as the accused, the effect is that the paper burden of a criminal case can now be discharged electronically.
2. Kinds of Report, and What the Magistrate May Do
Figure 2: The report, its two conclusions and the options open to the Magistrate
2.1 Charge sheet and closure report
Neither expression appears in the Sanhita. A report recommending prosecution is called a charge sheet in practice; a report recommending that no case be proceeded with is called a final report or a closure report. Both are police reports within section 2(1)(t), because the definition attaches to the provision under which the report is forwarded and not to the conclusion it reaches. The distinction matters only in what the Magistrate does with it.
⚠ An incomplete report is not a police report A report filed for the purpose of defeating the right to default bail, without the investigation having been completed and without the material required by section 193(6), is not a report under section 193(3). The right to release under section 187 on the expiry of the period is not defeated by the filing of a document that does not answer the description of a police report. The test is whether the investigation has in fact been completed as against the accused concerned and whether the report contains the particulars the section requires. A report filed with the collection of material still pending, or without the accompanying statements and documents, invites the objection. |
2.2 The Magistrate is not bound by the opinion in the report
The opinion of the investigating officer is an opinion and no more. On a report recommending prosecution the Magistrate may take cognizance under section 210(1)(a) or decline to do so. On a report recommending closure he may accept it and drop the proceeding, disagree with it and take cognizance on the material in the report itself, or direct further investigation. Where the informant files a protest petition against a closure report, the Magistrate may treat it as a complaint and proceed under Chapter XVI.
Before accepting a report recommending closure the Magistrate must give the informant notice and an opportunity of being heard, because acceptance brings the proceeding to an end. That requirement is examined in the topic on complaint, FIR and police report.
3. Further Investigation under Section 193(9)
Section 193(9), BNSS 2023 Nothing in this section shall be deemed to preclude further investigation in respect of an offence after a report under sub-section (3) has been forwarded to the Magistrate and, where upon such investigation the officer in charge obtains further evidence, oral or documentary, he shall forward to the Magistrate a further report or reports regarding such evidence in the form the State Government may by rules provide; and the provisions of sub-sections (3) to (8) shall, as far as may be, apply to such report as they apply to a report forwarded under sub-section (3). Provided that further investigation during the trial may be conducted with the permission of the Court trying the case and the same shall be completed within ninety days, which may be extended with the permission of the Court. |
The proviso is new. Section 173(8) of the CrPC placed no time limit on further investigation and said nothing expressly about permission during the trial, and the practice of filing supplementary reports long after the trial had begun was a recognised source of delay. The Sanhita subjects further investigation during the trial to two controls: the permission of the trial court, and a ninety-day limit extendable only with the court’s permission.
📖 Vinay Tyagi v. Irshad Ali alias Deepak, (2013) 5 SCC 762 Facts: Two contradictory reports had been filed by different agencies in the same case, one implicating the accused and the other exonerating them, and the court was asked to determine the status of each and the powers available to a Magistrate and to the higher courts to order investigation afresh. Held: The Supreme Court analysed the kinds of report and the kinds of investigation. It distinguished a further investigation, which is a continuation of the earlier investigation by the same agency and results in a supplementary report that is read with the original one; a fresh or de novo investigation, which wipes out the earlier investigation and its report entirely and is ordered only in exceptional cases and only by the High Court or the Supreme Court; and reinvestigation, which is not available to a Magistrate. The Court held that a Magistrate has the power to direct further investigation, but not to order a fresh investigation, and that a supplementary report does not efface the original report; both are before the court. Ratio: Further investigation continues what has gone before and produces a report read with the original; a fresh investigation replaces it and is reserved to the superior courts. The distinction determines what the Magistrate may order and what survives of the earlier material. |
📖 Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya v. State of Gujarat, (2019) 17 SCC 1 Facts: The question was whether a Magistrate retains the power to order further investigation after he has taken cognizance of the offence on a police report, a point on which earlier decisions had differed and on which one line of authority had held the power to be lost once cognizance was taken. Held: The Supreme Court held that the Magistrate’s power to order further investigation continues after cognizance has been taken and until the charge is framed. The power flows from the provisions on the Magistrate’s direction to investigate read with the scheme of the Code, and it exists so that the Magistrate may ensure that a proper investigation has been made; it is exercisable at the instance of the accused as well. A contrary reading would leave the court powerless to correct a manifestly deficient investigation at the only stage at which correction is useful. Ratio: The Magistrate may direct further investigation after cognizance and up to the framing of the charge. The power exists to secure a proper investigation and is not confined to the pre-cognizance stage. |
The two decisions fit together, and the Sanhita has codified the second half of the position. Further investigation before the trial begins requires no permission from the court, though the Magistrate may direct it; further investigation once the trial has begun requires permission and must be completed within ninety days. A fresh or de novo investigation remains a matter for the High Court or the Supreme Court.
4. Section 193 and Section 173 CrPC Compared
Element | Section 173, CrPC 1973 | Section 193, BNSS 2023 |
|---|---|---|
Mode of forwarding the report | Physical forwarding | Including through electronic communication |
Contents of the report | Clauses (a) to (g) | The same, with the addition of the medical examination report clause and the sequence of custody of an electronic device |
Information to the informant or victim | Only communication of the action taken, under section 173(2)(ii) | Progress of the investigation within ninety days under section 193(3)(ii), and the action taken under (iii) |
Two-month completion for sexual offences | Section 173(1A) | Section 193(2), extended to the specified BNS offences and POCSO offences |
Withholding part of a statement | Section 173(6) | Section 193(7), unchanged in substance |
Copies for the accused | Section 173(7), read with section 207 | Section 193(8), duly indexed, and supply by electronic communication is deemed duly served |
Further investigation | Section 173(8); no time limit, and permission not expressly required | Section 193(9); during the trial, permission of the court and completion within ninety days |
Report through a superior officer | Section 173(3) | Section 193(4), unchanged |
5. Key Takeaways
The position stated shortly 1. A police report is a report forwarded by a police officer to a Magistrate under section 193(3): section 2(1)(t). Whether it recommends prosecution or closure, it is a police report. 2. Section 193(1) requires every investigation to be completed without unnecessary delay; section 193(2) fixes two months for the specified sexual offences under the BNS and the specified POCSO offences, running from the recording of the information. 3. The report may be forwarded by electronic communication and must state, among other things, whether an offence appears to have been committed and by whom, the custody position of the accused, and the sequence of custody of any electronic device. 4. Section 193(3)(ii) requires the informant or victim to be told of the progress of the investigation within ninety days; sub-clause (iii) requires communication of the action taken. 5. Section 193(6) requires the documents relied on and the statements of the proposed witnesses to accompany the report; section 193(7) permits the officer to request the Magistrate to exclude a part, the decision being the Magistrate’s. 6. Section 193(8) requires duly indexed copies for supply under section 230, and electronic supply is deemed duly served. 7. The Magistrate is not bound by the opinion in the report. He may take cognizance, decline, accept a closure report after hearing the informant, or direct further investigation. 8. Further investigation continues the earlier investigation and produces a supplementary report read with the original; a fresh or de novo investigation replaces it and is ordered only by the High Court or Supreme Court: Vinay Tyagi. 9. The Magistrate may direct further investigation after cognizance and until the charge is framed: Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya. During the trial it requires the court’s permission and must be completed in ninety days. |
6. Frequently Asked Questions
What is a police report under the BNSS?
A report forwarded by a police officer to a Magistrate under section 193(3) on the completion of an investigation, as defined in section 2(1)(t). Both a charge sheet and a closure report answer that description.
Within what time must an investigation be completed?
Without unnecessary delay under section 193(1). For offences under sections 64 to 68, 70 and 71 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and sections 4, 6, 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act, within two months from the date the information was recorded, under section 193(2).
Must the victim be told about the progress of the investigation?
Yes. Section 193(3)(ii) requires the police officer to inform the informant or the victim of the progress of the investigation within ninety days, by any means including electronic communication. There was no such duty under the CrPC.
What is the new requirement about electronic devices in the police report?
Section 193(3)(i)(i) requires the report to state the sequence of custody in the case of an electronic device. The purpose is evidentiary: the integrity of electronic material depends on an unbroken chain of custody, and the section places that chain on the record at the time the report is filed.
Can further investigation be conducted after the charge sheet is filed?
Yes, under section 193(9). Before the trial begins no permission of the court is expressly required, though the Magistrate may direct it. Once the trial has begun the permission of the trial court is required and the further investigation must be completed within ninety days, extendable with the court’s permission.
Can a Magistrate order a fresh investigation?
No. A Magistrate may direct further investigation, which is a continuation by the same agency producing a supplementary report. A fresh or de novo investigation, which wipes out the earlier investigation, may be ordered only by the High Court or the Supreme Court, and only in exceptional cases.
Related Topics
- Complaint, FIR and Police Report: The Distinction
- The Public Prosecutor under the BNSS, 2023
- Electronic Communication under the BNSS, 2023
- Inquiry, Investigation and Trial: Meaning and Distinction
- Section 187 BNSS: Remand, Police Custody and Default Bail
- Supply of Documents to the Accused and the Victim: Section 230, BNSS