Opinion of Police

Ipsi dixit of the police is not binding on the Court, yet it can be considered if it is based on some cogent and convincing evidence.

Court while dealing with police report (charge-sheet) must not be influenced with opinion of the investigating officer but their opinion has to be based on legal and lawful reasoning while keeping the settled principles of law into view.

Opinion of the Police Officer was not binding upon the court.

Ipse dixit of the police was not of any binding effect upon the Magistrate.

Opinion of police with regard to the innocence of accused is inadmissible in evidence.

Police Officer was the person who had visited the crime scene immediately after the occurrence; came across different persons and interrogated them, inspected the crime scenes; probes the circumstances of the case from different persons, who opt not to become witness and then form opinion

If declaration of the investigator of innocence had some support from the attending circumstances of the case, there was no reason to brush it aside without assigning any reasons.

Petitioner was nominated with other co-accused, who allegedly made firing at nephew of complainant with the allegation of "Siyah-Kari" resulting into his death

Petitioner contended that due to previous enmity, he was involved in general allegation of firing at the deceased as incident took place at dark hours of winter without any source of light, so police after investigation placed his name in Column No.2 of the challan

Benefit of plea of previous enmity could not be extended to the petitioner at bail stage, as enmity cut both ways which could be a cause for crime as well as implication

Parties were already known to each other so the identity of petitioner could not be mistaken

High Court observed that it would make no difference that the injury caused by the petitioner was fatal or otherwise, because the intention of the petitioner was very much there

Record showed that Judicial Magistrate did not approve the opinion of police regarding innocence of the petitioner and joined him as an accused

Opinion of police was not binding on the Court

Petitioner was, prima facie, connected with the commission of offence which fell within prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.

Bail was refused to petitioner, in circumstances.

Declaration of innocence or otherwise of co-accused by police, alone was not relevant factor having bearing on case of other co-accused and against whom Court had to see a prima facie case.

Opinion of police was not binding on the court, yet the same could be taken into consideration while deciding bail application.

Police opinion might be taken into consideration for disposal of bail application.

Opinion of the Police qua innocence or otherwise of accused, was inadmissible in evidence.

Plea of alibi and claim of presence of one witness to be at police station (not at place of incident) had been brought on record through course of second investigation

Validity

Second investigating officer attempted to create smoke screen in order to hide some facts in favour of accused

Such opinion of police was not of binding nature nor it was proper to examine legality of such document as it would amount to deeper appreciation of evidence, which was not permissible under law

Sufficient material, prima facie, was available linking accused with commission of offence with which he stood charged

Bail was refused in circumstances.

Opinion of Police qua innocence or guilt of accused, was inadmissible in evidence.

Accused could not be convicted, merely on the ground that he was declared guilty by the Police during the course of investigation.