Criminal Procedure: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)
The Police Report under Section 193 BNSS
The Police Report under Section 193 BNSS: Contents, the Two-Month Limit in Sexual Offences, the Ninety-Day Victim Update, Further Investigation and the Supplementary Charge Sheet
Section 193 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is the provision at which an investigation ends and a prosecution begins. The report it requires is the document on which the Magistrate takes cognizance, the document from which the accused learns what is alleged, and the document against which every later development in the case is measured. Practice calls it a charge sheet where it recommends prosecution and a final report where it does not, but the Sanhita knows only one thing: a report under sub-section (3), which is a “police report” within section 2(1)(t) whatever its conclusion.
The section has been changed in three respects that matter. The report must now state the sequence of custody of an electronic device. The informant or victim must be told of the progress of the investigation within ninety days. And further investigation during the trial now requires the permission of the Court and must be completed within ninety days.
1. Time Limits
Provision | Requirement |
|---|---|
Section 193(1) | Every investigation shall be completed without unnecessary delay. A general obligation, not a period |
Section 193(2) | The investigation in relation to an offence under the specified sections dealing with sexual offences against women, and under the specified sections 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 |
Section 187 | The outer limit is supplied indirectly: detention may not exceed sixty or ninety days, and on expiry without a report the accused is entitled to default bail. In a summons case, an investigation not concluded within six months of the arrest must be stopped unless special reasons are shown |
Section 193(9), proviso | Further investigation during the trial shall be completed within ninety days, extendable by the Court |
⚠ The two-month rule in sexual offences The period runs from the date on which the information was recorded, not from the date of arrest or of the identification of a suspect. It is therefore a limit on the whole of the investigation and not merely on the period after a suspect emerges. The Sanhita has extended the rule to the specified offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Section 173 of the CrPC confined the two-month period to the offences against women. The section prescribes no consequence for exceeding the period, and it does not create a bar to prosecution. Its effect is on the supervision of the investigation: an investigation that has run past the period is one the Magistrate and the supervisory officers are entitled to ask about, and it is the provision on which an application for a direction under section 175(3) or for further monitoring is founded. |
2. The Contents of the Report
Figure 1: The nine particulars
Section 193(3), BNSS 2023 As soon as it is completed, the officer in charge of the police station shall — (i) forward, including through electronic communication, to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence on a police report, a report in the form as the State Government may, by rules, provide, stating — (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 he has been released on his bond or bail bond; (g) whether he has been forwarded in custody under section 190; (h) whether the report of medical examination of the woman has been attached where investigation relates to an offence under the specified sections; (i) the sequence of custody in case of electronic device; (ii) communicate, in such manner as the State Government may, by rules, provide, the action taken by him, to the person, if any, by whom the information relating to the commission of the offence was first given; and the police officer shall, within a period of ninety days, inform the informant or the victim, as the case may be, the progress of the investigation by any means including through electronic communication. |
2.1 The two new duties
- The sequence of custody of an electronic device. Clause (i) has no counterpart in the CrPC. It requires the report to state the chain of custody of any electronic device — who seized it, who held it, when it moved and to whom. It is the only express chain-of-custody requirement anywhere in the Sanhita, and it is confined to electronic devices, though the same problem arises for every kind of physical material.
- The ninety-day progress update. Clause (ii) requires the officer, within ninety days, to inform the informant or the victim of the progress of the investigation, by any means including electronic communication. It answers a complaint that was universal: a person who lodged a report and heard nothing for years had no statutory entitlement to be told anything at all.
⚠ What the progress duty does and does not do It is owed to the informant or the victim, which matters where the two are different persons. The Sanhita is careful to include the victim independently, as it does in section 173(2) on the free copy of the first information report. It requires the progress to be communicated, which is more than the fact that the case is pending. The provision contemplates telling the person what has been done. It prescribes no consequence for a failure. Its practical value is that a person who has not been told within ninety days now has a statutory footing on which to apply to the Magistrate or to the superior officers, where previously he had only a grievance. |
3. What Goes with the Report
- Section 193(6). The officer shall forward to the Magistrate, along with the report, all documents or relevant extracts on which the prosecution proposes to rely, other than those already sent during the investigation; and he may, stating his reasons, request that any part be excluded from the copies to be furnished to the accused, on the ground that it is not relevant to the subject-matter of the proceeding or that its disclosure is not essential in the interests of justice and is inexpedient in the public interest.
- Section 193(8). Where the report relates to a case to which section 190 applies, the officer shall forward with it the statements recorded under section 180 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses.
- Section 193(4) and (5). Where the report is submitted by a subordinate officer, the officer in charge forwards it; and the report is communicated to the informant.
- Section 230. The Magistrate furnishes copies to the accused free of cost, and the Sanhita now requires this within fourteen days from the date of production or appearance.
Two points follow. The exclusion permitted by sub-section (6) is judicially controlled: the officer requests, the Magistrate decides, and the accused may contest. And what the accused receives is defined by what the prosecution proposes to rely on — which is why the case diary, containing everything else, remains closed to him under section 192(5).
4. Further Investigation
Figure 2: Further investigation, and the three things distinguished
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 of the police station obtains further evidence, oral or documentary, he shall forward to the Magistrate a further report or reports regarding such evidence in the prescribed form; and the provisions of sub-sections (3) to (8) shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to such report or reports as they apply in relation 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 a period of ninety days which may be extended with the permission of the Court. |
📖 Ram Lal Narang v. State (Delhi Administration), (1979) 2 SCC 322 Facts: A charge sheet had been filed and cognizance taken. The police thereafter came into possession of further material disclosing a wider conspiracy and conducted a further investigation, on which a second charge sheet was filed. It was contended that once a report had been submitted and cognizance taken, the power to investigate was exhausted, and that any further investigation required the permission of the court and was in any event an interference with the judicial proceeding. Held: The Supreme Court held that the power of the police to investigate is not exhausted by the submission of a report. The provision expressly preserves the power, and there is nothing in the Code which obliges the police to seek the permission of the Magistrate before conducting a further investigation; the court’s taking of cognizance does not put an end to the statutory duty of the police to investigate a crime. The Court observed that it would be desirable for the police to inform the court and to seek its formal concurrence where a case is pending, so that the court is not taken by surprise, but held that the absence of such permission does not vitiate the further investigation or the report that follows. It distinguished further investigation, which supplements what has been done, from a fresh investigation displacing it, which stands on a different footing. Ratio: The power of the police to investigate further is not exhausted by the filing of a report or the taking of cognizance, and does not require the permission of the court, though informing the court is desirable. |
The proviso the Sanhita has added modifies that position for one situation only. During the trial, further investigation now requires the permission of the Court and must be completed within ninety days, extendable by the Court. Before the trial begins, the position remains as it was: the police may investigate further of their own motion, and the report follows in the same form.
4.1 Three things distinguished
Further investigation | Re-investigation | A second FIR | |
|---|---|---|---|
What it is | A continuation of the same investigation, supplementing what was done | A fresh investigation, displacing the first | A new case registered on the same occurrence |
Who may do it | The police, of their own motion before the trial; with the Court’s permission during it | Not the police. Only a superior court may direct one, and only in a rare case | — |
Permitted? | Yes, expressly by section 193(9) | Exceptionally, on a superior court’s direction | No, where the occurrence is the same. A counter-case or a distinct occurrence is different |
What it produces | A further report, the supplementary charge sheet | A fresh report replacing the earlier one | Liable to be quashed |
📖 Dinesh Dalmia v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2007) 8 SCC 770 Facts: A charge sheet had been filed against the accused, who had absconded and was arrested later. On his arrest he claimed default bail, contending that the investigation so far as he was concerned had not been completed within the statutory period and that the charge sheet already filed, which was followed by a further investigation and a supplementary report, could not be treated as a completed investigation in his case. Held: The Supreme Court held that the filing of a supplementary charge sheet on a further investigation does not mean that the earlier charge sheet was incomplete; a report is a report within the section if the investigation as it then stood was complete and the material the section requires accompanied it. The power of further investigation being expressly preserved, the exercise of that power does not convert a completed investigation into an incomplete one. The Court held that the entitlement to default bail depends on whether a report was filed within the period, and that where a valid report has been filed the right does not arise merely because further investigation is afterwards undertaken. It reiterated that a report filed merely to deprive the accused of default bail, without the investigation being complete, would stand on an entirely different footing. Ratio: A supplementary report on further investigation does not render the original report incomplete, and default bail does not arise merely because further investigation follows. But a report filed only to stop the clock is not a report at all. |
5. Key Takeaways
The position stated shortly 1. A report under section 193(3) is a “police report” within section 2(1)(t) whatever its conclusion. “Charge sheet” and “final report” are names practice gives to the two outcomes. 2. The report may now be forwarded including through electronic communication, in the form the State Government prescribes by rules. 3. It must state nine particulars, of which clause (i) is new: the sequence of custody in case of electronic device. It is the only express chain-of-custody requirement in the Sanhita. 4. Clause (ii) is also new: the officer must, within ninety days, inform the informant or the victim of the progress of the investigation, by any means including electronic communication. 5. Section 193(2): the investigation in the specified sexual offences, now extended to the specified POCSO offences, must be completed within two months from the date the information was recorded. 6. Section 193(6): all documents on which the prosecution proposes to rely are forwarded, and the officer may request exclusion of a part with reasons; the Magistrate decides. 7. Section 193(8): the statements under section 180 of the witnesses the prosecution proposes to examine accompany the report; section 230 requires copies to the accused free of cost within fourteen days. 8. Section 193(9) preserves further investigation, and the power is not exhausted by the filing of a report or the taking of cognizance: Ram Lal Narang. 9. The proviso is new: further investigation during the trial requires the permission of the Court and must be completed within ninety days, extendable. 10. A supplementary report does not make the original report incomplete, and does not by itself give rise to default bail; but a report filed merely to stop the clock, without the investigation being complete, is not a report: Dinesh Dalmia. |
6. Frequently Asked Questions
What is a charge sheet?
The name practice gives to a report under section 193(3) which concludes that an offence appears to have been committed and identifies by whom. The Sanhita does not use the expression; it speaks only of a report, which is a police report within section 2(1)(t) whatever its conclusion.
What must the police report contain?
The names of the parties; the nature of the information; the names of the persons acquainted with the circumstances; whether an offence appears to have been committed and by whom; whether the accused has been arrested, released on bond or forwarded in custody; whether the medical examination report of the woman is attached in the specified offences; and the sequence of custody in the case of an electronic device.
What is the time limit for investigating a sexual offence?
Two months from the date on which the information was recorded, under section 193(2). The Sanhita has extended the rule from the specified offences against women to the specified offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
Must the victim be told how the investigation is going?
Yes. Section 193(3)(ii) requires the police officer, within ninety days, to inform the informant or the victim of the progress of the investigation, by any means including electronic communication. The duty is new.
Can the police investigate further after filing a charge sheet?
Yes. Section 193(9) expressly preserves the power, and it is not exhausted by the filing of a report or by the taking of cognizance: Ram Lal Narang. But further investigation during the trial now requires the permission of the Court and must be completed within ninety days.
Does a supplementary charge sheet give rise to default bail?
No. The filing of a supplementary report on further investigation does not render the original report incomplete, and the right to default bail turns on whether a valid report was filed within the statutory period: Dinesh Dalmia. A report filed merely to stop the clock, without the investigation being complete, is a different matter.
Related Topics
- Final Report and the Magistrate’s Options
- The Protest Petition
- Investigation under the BNSS, 2023: Chapter XIII, Sections 173 to 196
- Section 187 BNSS: the Periods, Police Custody and Default Bail
- Complaint, FIR and Police Report: The Distinction
- Forensic Investigation under the BNSS, 2023: Section 176(3)