The cabinet on Thursday approved a draft ordinance to majorly change the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, including a 60-day time frame for investigation and safeguards against arrest and remand.
The approval was given subject to vetting of the law ministry that placed the draft before the cabinet.
The draft proposes the insertion of a new section 173B into the CrPC stipulating that the investigation into a case must be finished in 60 working days after the information about the offence is received.
In case of failure, the investigation officer will apply to the court seeking additional time giving specific reasons for the failure and time required, and send a copy of the application to the superior officer supervising the investigation, stipulates the draft.
It says that the court may extend the investigation time frame if it seems reasonable and the investigation must be completed within the extended time frame.
If the extended deadline is missed, the investigation officer must report the reasons to the court and send a copy to the supervising officer, stipulates the proposed section.
After examining the report, or if no report is given, the court may assign the investigation to another officer and may also consider the delay as poor performance or misconduct by the investigation officer and may order actions against the officer according to service rules, it stipulates.
Dhaka Special Tribunal-2 chief public prosecutor Borhan Uddin told 抖阴精品 on Wednesday, 鈥業 think the amendment will help reducing sufferings of litigants and they will get quick justice without delay.鈥�
The draft proposed amendments to several sections to set in safeguards against arrest.
It proposed insertion of section 46A, stipulating that during an arrest, the police officer or any other person must wear a clear and visible name tag and must show the identity card to the person being arrested and to others present at the scene.
A memorandum of the arrest must be prepared which must be signed by at least one witness鈥攅ither a family member of the arrested person or a respected person from the area, stipulates the proposed section.
If someone is arrested from a place other than their home, the police must聽 inform the family about the time, place and reason of the arrest in 12 hours, it says.
It also says that the arrested person must be taken to the nearest hospital for a medical check-up or treatment. If there is any injury on the arrested person, the doctor must give a certificate, and the officer must write down the reason for the injury.
The arrested person must be allowed to meet a lawyer of his/her choice or a close family member in 12 hours, it stipulates.
Proposed section 46B stipulates that any arrested person shall be entitled to meet an advocate of his/her choice immediately before and after his interrogation.
Proposed section 46C states that the arresting officer must record in the official register the reason for arrest, details of the informant or complainant, the notified relative or friend and the officer maintaining the register must provide information to any relative, friend or neighbor of the arrested person upon request.
Proposed section 46E states that it shall be the duty of the person having custody of an arrested person to take care of his/her health and safety.
An amendment to section 54 proposes that the police may arrest anyone without any warrant when anyone commits a cognisable offence in their presence and anyone reasonably suspected, complained against, or credibly reported to have committed a cognisable offence punishable with up to 7 years鈥� imprisonment.
A police officer may arrest a person if the officer believes the offence was committed, and arrest is necessary to prevent further offence, ensure proper investigation, prevent evidence tampering, prevent threats or inducement to witnesses, ensure court appearance and the officer must record reasons for the arrest in writing.
However, no police officer shall arrest a person under this section for the purpose of detaining him under any law providing for preventive detention.
The draft proposed to insert section 54A in the CrPC. It states that every police officer arresting any person without any warrant shall, at the time of making arrest, communicate to him the reasons for which he is arrested.
The draft also proposed an amendment to section 69 to include that the Court may聽send summons using electronic means such as Short Message Service, voice call, instant messaging service, or electronic mail, but the proof of such service shall be preserved with the record.
An amendment to section 67 states that a magistrate may authorise detention of an accused for up to 15 days, regardless of jurisdiction. If the magistrate lacks trial jurisdiction and further detention is not needed, the accused must be sent to a competent magistrate.
It also included in this section that a magistrate may order a medical examination of the accused before police custody begins. After custody ends, the accused must be produced without delay. If injuries are visible or torture is alleged, the magistrate must order another medical exam. If torture is confirmed, legal action must follow.
The draft proposed to include a new section of 167A regarding duties of magistrates in relation to shown arrest and detention, it stated that if police want a person already in custody in another case to be shown arrested in a new case, the Magistrate must ensure the person is produced with the case diary and given a chance to be heard, and the request must appear justified.
The Magistrate shall not authorise judicial custody if the arrest is solely for preventive detention and if the magistrate believes any officer has unlawfully confined someone, action must be taken under section 220 of the Penal Code.
An amendment to section 498 was also proposed in the draft. It states that any court, while releasing the accused on bail, may impose reasonable and fair conditions to prevent his absconding or to ensure his good behaviour.
The amendment to section 499 also proposed that the bond referred to in this section may be submitted to the court either in person or online, as required by the Court, subject to the verification of the identity of the sureties through National Identification Number or other appropriate means.
The proposed amendment to section 544 states that any court may, at any stage of a criminal case, take necessary steps or give orders to protect the informant, complainant, victim, or witness, either on its own or upon request.
Earlier, on June 29, the advisory council approved an amendment of section 173 of the CrPC incorporating a new provision to prevent arbitrary arrests and false cases.
On June 5, the law ministry held a meeting with stakeholders, including academics, jurists, and public prosecutors, to finalise the draft of the ordinance.
