ZERO FIR TRANSIT BAIL AND TRANSIT REMAND

PROFESSIONALS' LAW INSTITUTE, SCO 135/2, Sector 24D, Chandigarh (entry backside)TOPIC: ZERO FIR, TRANSIT BAIL AND TRANSIT REMAND:ZERO FIRAs per the Sec 154 of Criminal procedure Code, every Police officer is law bound to register the First Information Report of any cognizable offence committed, irrespective of the jurisdiction in which the offence was committed. When a cognizable offence is reported, the police officer registering the case forthwith starts the investigation, if it is committed in his jurisdiction. if it is not committed in his jurisdiction, he registers the FIR under number 00 and sends it to the police station, where the offence was committed for further investigation. Such FIR is called as zero FIR. It is for the convenience of the victim that instead of making the victim run from pillar to post, the police officer, where the victim approaches as per his convenience, the case is recorded and police officer sends it to the concerned police station.Few years ago, an atrocious act of a self-proclaimed Godman, Asumal Sirumalani Harpalani, alias, Asaram Bapu tormented the citizens of this country. He was accused of raping a minor girl who belonged to Sahajanpur, UP. She was a student, residing in one of his ashrams. The rape was committed in Jodhpur, Rajasthan where the girl and her family were called by the godman on the pretext of several false “spiritual” claims.Aggrieved by the incident, the girl’s father approached the Jodhpur, and then the Saharanpur police to lodge an FIR. The police, however, refused to register a complaint owing to the influence Asa Ram exercised in both the cities. Then the father of the victim approached the police at Kamla Nagar Police Station, New Delhi and lodged an FIR.This was made possible due to one of the many changes brought about by our justice system after the brutal Nirbhaya rape case which left the country in agony. The Nirbhaya gang rape appalled the then Manmohan Singh government. Subsequently, a judicial committee headed by the former Chief Justice of India, Justice J.S. Verma was constituted to propose stringent reforms in the management of crimes against women.Satvinder Kaur v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), 1999 AIR (SC) 3596Held : (i) At the stage of investigation, there is no question of interference under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code on the ground that Investigating Officer has no territorial jurisdiction.(ii) SHO has statutory authority under Section 156 Criminal Procedure Code to investigate any cognizable offence for which an FIR is lodged.(iii) After investigation is over, if Investigating Officer arrives at the conclusion that cause of action for lodging FIR has not arisen within his territorial jurisdiction, then he is required to submit a report under Section 170 Criminal Procedure Code and to forward the case to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of offence.In Bimla Rawal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2008 (28) RCR (criminal) 944 (Delhi HC)In this case FIR was registered by wife in place 'D' two years after death of husband against in-laws living in place 'M'. it was held that It was clear that Police could register an FIR of commission of cognizable crime but after registration of FIR, if on scrutiny or investigation, it was found that crime was not committed within jurisdiction of that police station but was committed within jurisdiction of another police station, FIR should be transferred to that police station. However, if at time of registration of FIR itself, it was apparent on face of it that crime was committed outside jurisdiction of the police station, police after registration of FIR should transfer FIR to that police station for investigation. In this case FIR had been registered against family of deceased husband though the parties lived only in 'M'. Marriage was performed in place 'M'. Wife (Complainant) all long lived with her husband in place 'M' except for a short period when she lived with her father and her husband in place 'D'. She made no allegations against her husband's behaviour during her stay in place 'D'. All allegations were in respect of her stay in place 'M'. It was held that FIR cannot be quashed on this ground but allowed the petition to extent that impugned FIR transferred to place 'M'. Illustrative question:
Suppose, a heinous crime of rape occurred in Mohali (Punjab) and was registered via a zero FIR filed at police station in Chandigarh. Mohali police conducted a medical examination of the rape victim. A judicial order was given by a Chandigarh local court to take quick action on the complaint of the victim following which, a Zero FIR was registered at Chandigarh police station and the case was transferred to Mohali police station in Gurgaon. Now is this procedure Correct?The concept of Zero FIRAs per the concept, Zero FIR is a FIR that can be filed in any police station regardless of the place of incidence or jurisdiction.   The same is later transferred to the l Police Station having competent jurisdiction after investigation and filing with a magistrate. What distinguishes Zero FIR from Ordinary FIR is that in the latter, FIR is registered by a serial number in police station but in the former one an FIR is instituted at any Police Station other than the jurisdictional Police Station concerned, that is the place where incident took place, and such an FIR is registered but not numbered. Such unnumbered FIR simply is then forwarded to the concerned Police Station where it gets numbered and further acted upon. Hence those FIR’s are known to be Zero FIR’s. For instance an Offence is committed within the jurisdictional limit of ‘A’ police station & FIR is lodge at ‘B’ police station. Then by the procedure, if it is revealed that the offence is committed within the jurisdiction limit of the other police station the FIR will be channelize to that police station as ZERO number FIR. The Police Station registering the Zero number FIR is required to make some prelude investigation into the case before directing it to the concerned Police Station.Legality of ZERO FIRThe provision of Zero FIR came up as recommendation in Justice Verma Committee Report in the new Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, devised after the December 2012 gang rape of a 23-year-old girl in the territory.However, policemen by and large deny knowing about provisions of “Zero FIR” and direct the complainant to Police Station having jurisdiction but Clause (e) of Section 460 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) says that if any Magistrate not empowered by laws to call for cognizance of an offence positioned in section 190 (a) or (b) erroneously but in good faith does take cognizance, the proceeding minutes will not be set aside merely on the grounds of not being empowered for same. If at the time of initiation of FIR, it looks evident that the crime was committed outside the jurisdiction of the concerned police station, then the police must be appropriately ordered to register a Zero FIR, and ensure that the FIR is transferred to the jurisdictional police station. If there is a failure in compiling with the instruction of FIR registration on acknowledgement of information about the offence, it will invite prosecution of the police officer under section 166A which provides a rigorous imprisonment of six months be extended to two years. This evasion of responsibility may invite the departmental action for the police officer.The Centre has asked all the states to make amendments in the state laws with respect to the registration of the Zero FIR on receipt of complaint or information about a crime without getting into argument related to the jurisdiction. Central Government, keeping in mind, the influence of the Zero FIR has warned by invoking the amendment in the criminal law that if there is any refusal with regards to the registering of the Zero FIR, it will lead to imprisonment.  This ordered amendment empowers the police to register the complaint acknowledged in police station other then the jurisdictional police station where crime has been committed. The concept of Zero FIR is a free jurisdiction FIR, brought up in order to avoid the delay in filing the crime and to avoid wastage of time that  adversely impacts the victim and gives a free way to offenders getting an opportunity to escape from the clutches of the law.THE IMPACTü  As per static report, there is a crime committed against women in every 1.7 minutes, and rape is committed within every 16 minutes recorded in this country and domestic violence done in every 4.4 minutes against every girl. Zero FIR is provided as a right to women which she can exercise as required. Zero FIR in cases of any such heinous crime done against her in any place or at any moment acts as a remedy in the hands of the women.
ü  Zero FIR is also a great power to the passengers on rail journey for a direction in making the travel safe and hassle free for the millions of passengers on frequent journey. So, as per the requirement the victim can file the case against theft in the place that is nearest to their approach while travelling.
ü  Certain grave crimes like accident, murder and rape that require immediate action from the concerned authorities and to collect evidentiary proof from the party and place like samples, deposition from the eye witnesses and circumstantial evidences. A Zero FIR helps take into account of this prelim action regardless of deciding the territorial limits of the crime.
As is the well-settled rule when there is certain good there is always something bad attached to it. And the biggest drawback is in the basic concept of the Zero FIR provision i.e., for say a crime occur in a place and reported in other jurisdiction and if there is certain collusion between the police staff of the station where the FIR instituted and the offender then the whole root of the provision collapses. Sometimes, complainant can take benefit of his links and get FIR registered in another jurisdiction against the innocent accused. TRANSIT REMAND AND TRANSIT BAILTransit Remand:­ A transit remand is not specifically defined under the Code. However, when a warrant of arrest is executed outside the district in which it was issued, and the court which issued the warrant is not within 30 km of the place of arrest, then the person arrested may be produced before Executive Magistrate, District Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police who shall direct his removal in custody to such court.  In case of bailable offence such Magistrate/ DSP/ CP shall release the accused on bail, and if the offence is non­bailable it shall be lawful for Chief Judicial Magistrate or Session Judge to release accused on bail, by invoking powers under Section 81 ­ proviso II, subject to the provision of Section 437 of Cr. P.C. In this regard judgment of Hon'ble High Court in Criminal Application No.402/2013, in Malti Ravindra Shah V/s. State of Maharashtra may be referred regarding powers of granting transit remand. Sec.80 of Crpc. Procedure of arrest of person against whom warrant issuedWhen a warrant of arrest is executed outside the district in which it was issued, the person arrested shall, unless the court which issued the warrant is within thirty kilometers of the place of arrest or is nearer than the Executive Magistrate or District Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the arrest was made, or unless security is taken under section 71, be taken before such Magistrate or District Superintendent or Commissioner.Sec.76 of Crpc. Person arrested to be brought before court without delay.The police officer or other person executing a warrant of arrest shall (subject to the provisions of section 71 as to security) without unnecessary delay bring the person arrested before the court before which he is required by law to produce such person.Provided that such delay shall not, in any case, exceed twenty-four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate’s court. Transit BailA court can grant bail even when crime is registered outside jurisdiction of the Court. It is called as Transit bail. Like regular bail and anticipatory bail, transit bail can be classified in two types i.ei)               Regular Transit Bail
ii)              Anticipatory Transit Bail.
Regular Transit BailAs per section 81 of Criminal Procedure Code, if the person arrested is brought before Magistrate having no jurisdiction, he can be released on bail i.e if the offence is bailable and arrested person is ready and willing to give bail to the satisfaction of the magistrate, or a direction has been endorsed under Sec.71 of the Cr.P.C. on the warrant and such person is ready and willing to give the security required by such direction. The magistrate can take such bail and security, as the case may be, and forward the bond, to the court which issued warrant. Further if the offence is non bailable, it is lawful for the Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Sessions Court to consider the provisions of section 437 of Cr.P.C., and also to consider information and the documents forwarded along with warrant as per section 78 (2) of Cr. P. Code. After going through section 437 of Cr.P.C. and information and documents referred in section 78 (2) of Cr.P.C., Chief Judicial Magistrate and Sessions Court can release such person on bail and forward the bond to the court which issued the warrant.Anticipatory Transit BailThe anticipatory transit bail is covered by section 37 438 of Cr.P.C. When any person is apprehending his arrest in a case registered beyond jurisdiction of the Court, he may apply to the Court or Court of Sessions for direction that in the event of his arrest he be released.Case Laws:L. R. Naidu v. State of Karnataka (Karnataka) 1984 CriLJ 757Karnataka High Court held that “Considering the provisions laid down in S. 438 of the Code and theprinciples of law with regard to anticipatory bail explained by their Lordships in Gurubaksh Singh’s case (1980 Cri LJ 1125) (SC) and also considering the view taken by at least three Division Benches to the case referred to above, we are of the opinion that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain application for anticipatory bail of a petitioner who resides within the jurisdiction of the Court, though he apprehends arrest in connection with a case which has been started outside the jurisdiction of this Court”. The position is re-iterated in a recent decision in CRIMINAL PETITION No.809 of 2013. Calcutta High Court also took the similar view in Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab 1981 Cri LJ NOC 159. It overruled the earlier position that “There is nothing in the provision suggesting that it is only the High Court or the Court of Session, within whose jurisdiction the case is registered that Court can grant bail. The view that any person apprehending arrest, in the circumstances referred to in Sec. 438, can seek bail in the Court, within whose jurisdiction he ordinarily resides, cannot be said to be opposed to the principle underlying this provision”.Regarding transit bail, the Himachal Pradesh High Court in Sanjeev Chandel v. State of H.P., (H.P.) 2003(2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 450  The Hon’ble HIGH COURT has held that “Court can entertain an application for grant of interim bail to the accused to enable him to surrender before the Court having jurisdiction in a case wherein he is accused of the commission of offence committed outside the jurisdiction of this Court.Gujarat High Court also took the similar view in Neela J. Shah Vs. State of Gujarat And Another 1998 CriLJ 2228 as: “Thus, an application under Section 438, Cr. P.C. should be finally decided only by the Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the alleged offence has been committed. The Court entertaining application for anticipatory bail at the first instance which does not have the territorial jurisdiction can give protection only for a brief period on adequate condition with a view to enable the person apprehending arrest to approach the Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the offence alleged to have been committed” In the case of Gurmit Kaur v. U.T. Chandigarh, (P&H) 2006(4) R.C.R.(Criminal) 710  the Hon’ble Punjab And Haryana High Court granted transit anticipatory bail whereby the case was registered at Jaipur and the accused was residing at Chandigarh.
x
x
x