All You Want To Know About Protest Petitions In Criminal Trial

The Criminal Procedure Code 1973 [Cr.P.C.] was amended in 2009 to introduce certain statutory rights for victims of crime. This included the introduction of a Victim's Compensation Scheme [Section 357-A Cr.P.C.] and conferring a right upon victims to appeal against judgments [By way of inserting a Proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C.]. During my first few months of practising, though, I found that the judiciary had played an equally important role towards increasing the role of the victim. For instance, although the Cr.P.C. does not strictly envisage hearing victims while considering grant of bail, many courts allowed them an opportunity to be heard at this stage. This post focuses on another such judicial creation - the Protest Petition.What is a Protest Petition?Simply put, a Protest Petition is a representation made by the victim/informant to the court during or after completion of investigation by the police. Today it is most commonly filed after the police file a Closure Report or B-Report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (what was earlier commonly understood as the Final Report) wherein the police concludes the allegations are not made out against an accused. The Protest Petition, then, is an opportunity granted to the victim/complainant to raise objections against these conclusions, before the Magistrate decides to apply her judicial mind to the Final Report.The Protest Petition through HistoryIt was extremely fascinating to trace the development of this concept through time. I daresay I have completed this task though, and am still trudging through the decisions. For instance, while the High Courts of Patna and Calcutta had extensively dealt with the legal niceties surrounding Protest Petitions before independence, the first reported judgment from Delhi does not come before 1990 in most databases! Unfortunately, I have not yet come across any discussion of how this was a unique method by judges to ensure some measure of ensuring victims-rights, at a time when such concepts were alien to the criminal process across most parts of the world.Another interesting facet was how the High Courts seem to have considered Protest Petitions as any representations protesting against police investigations. The term predominantly used in Calcutta was Naraji, which loosely translates to dissatisfaction. Naturally, this extended to petitions filed by both accused persons and complainants/victims, although the latter far outnumber the former. Further, the Protest Petition by an accused seems to have only been filed during the investigation, whereas those by complainants were filed during as well as after the conclusion of investigations.Lastly, the consideration of Protest Petitions and acceptance of Final Reports by the police also raised important issues concerning the nature of this exercise: whether it was an executive or a judicial function. If the task was considered an executive function, this meant there was limited scope for review of such an order in revision proceedings. This is purely of historical interest now, since the present Cr.P.C. makes a clear separation between the executive and judicial functions of the magistracy. It was not always so, and there were several reports before 1973 which considered how this separation could take place (the 37th Law Commission Report discusses this to some extent).Filing a Protest PetitionMany interesting procedural issues arose by allowing this intervention by complainants. I list some below:If the Magistrate has a Closure Report and a Protest Petition, can the latter be considered only if the Final Report is accepted?Does the Protest Petition have to be a 'Complaint' to take cognizance? Must the Complainant be examined on oath under Section 200 Cr.P.C. after taking cognizance on a Protest Petition?If the Magistrate takes cognizance on a Protest Petition when there is a Closure Report, would the case be tried as a complaint case or one based on a police report?If the Magistrate has a Protest Petition and Closure Report, can the Magistrate send the police back for further investigation to file a fresh report?If the Magistrate is rejecting the Closure Report and accepting the Protest Petition, should the case be transferred before another Magistrate for trial?Some of these questions can be answered with a degree of certainty. On the first question, there is no prohibition on considering the Protest Petition before accepting the Closure Report. The magistrate may well look at the protest petition beforehand and take cognizance on the Closure Report itself. The magistrate is also empowered to direct a further investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. after receiving a protest petition. Similarly, it is settled that if the magistrate does decide to take cognizance on the Protest Petition, it must satisfy ingredients of a 'Complaint' under Section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C., and then the complainant must be examined on oath before issuing summons.For the others, there remains some doubt...

All You Want To Know About Protest Petitions In Criminal Trial

Abhinav Sekhri

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

All You Want To Know About Protest Petitions In Criminal Trial

Abhinav Sekhri

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers