In H.N. Rishbud v. State of Delhi [H.N. Rishbud v. State of Delhi, AIR 1955 SC 196 :

1955 Cri LJ 526 : (1955) 1 SCR 1150] this Court contemplated the possibility of further investigation even after a court had taken cognizance of the case. While noticing that a police report resulting from an investigation was provided in Section 190 CrPC as the material on which cognizance was taken, it was pointed out that it could not be maintained that a valid and legal police report was the foundation of the jurisdiction of the court to take cognizance. It was held that where cognizance of the case had, in fact, been taken and the case had proceeded to termination, the invalidity of the precedent investigation did not vitiate the result unless miscarriage of justice had been caused thereby. It was said that a defect or illegality in investigation, however serious, had no direct bearing on the competence of the procedure relating to cognizance or trial.

Preliminary Examination Question Paper

PATNA HIGH COURT PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION DISTRICT JUDGE ENTRY LEVEL 2019

Related

Current Posts

Unexplained inordinate delay must be taken into consideration as a very crucial factor and ground for quashing a criminal complaint (SC-18/05/2023)

For passing order u/s 319 CrPC, ‘satisfaction’ as mentioned in para no106 of Hardeep Singh case is sufficient (SC-2/06/2023)

Ghanshyam Vs Yogendra Rathi (02/06/2023)

Indian Lok Sabha Debates on The Railways Budget 2014-15 (10/06/2014)