SC on Whether Non-Maintenance of General Diary renders Proceedings Illegal?

May 21, 2018

Case name: State by Lokayuktha Police v. H. Srinivas 

Date of Judgment: May 18, 2018

The main contention in the case raised by the respondents was that that the preliminary enquiry and the consequent Source Report filed by the Officer were done without entering the same in the General Diary, which according to them was mandatory and non­compliance of the same resulted in vitiating the entire proceeding.

Section 44 of the Police Act provides that it shall be the duty of every officer in charge of a police- station to keep a general diary to record therein all complaints and charges preferred, the names of all persons arrested, the names of the complainants, the offences charged against them, the weapons or property that shall have been taken from their possession or otherwise, and the names of the witnesses who shall have been examined. 

Hence, the Apex Court in the case was seminally concerned with the issue whether the absence of entries in the General Diary concerning the preliminary enquiry would render the proceedings illegal?

The Supreme Court while answering in the negative, relied on the precedent set in the case of Lalit Kumari v. Govt. of U.P.[1]. In the Lalitha Kumari case, the Apex Court while recognizing the mandatory registration of FIR noted that while ensuring and protecting the rights of the accused and the complainant, a preliminary inquiry should be made time­bound and in any case it should not exceed 7 days. The fact of such delay and the causes of it must be reflected in the General Diary entry.

Since the General Diary/Station Diary/Daily Diary is the record of all information received in a police station, we direct that all information relating to cognizable offences, whether resulting in registration of FIR or leading to an inquiry, must be mandatorily and meticulously reflected in the said diary and the decision to conduct a preliminary inquiry must also be reflected, as mentioned above.

Other observations made by the Apex Court are:

• That in the absence of entries in the General Diary concerning the preliminary enquiry would not be per se illegal.
• As the concept of maintaining General Diary has its origin under Section 44 of the Police Act of 1861 as applicable to States, which makes it an obligation for the concerned Police Officer to maintain a General Diary, but such non-maintenance per se may not be rendering the whole prosecution illegal. However, such non-­maintenance of General Diary may have consequences on merits of the case. 
• That as the genesis of a criminal case, in some   cases,   plays   an   important   role   in   establishing   the prosecution’s   case. It is an obligation of best efforts for the concerned officer to record all the events concerning an enquiry. That if the Officer   has   not recorded then it is for the Trial Court to weigh the effect of the same for reasons provided therein.
• That the obligation of maintenance of General Diary is part of course of conduct of the concerned officer, which may not itself have any bearing on the criminal trial unless some grave prejudice going to the root of the matter is shown to exist at the time of the trial.