Any person aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a policestation to record the information referred to in sub-section (1), may send the substance ofsuch information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, ifsatisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shalleither investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officersubordinate to him, in the manner provided by this Sanhita, and such officer shall have allthe powers of an officer in charge of the police station in relation to that offence failingwhich he may make an application under sub-section (3) of section 175 to the Magistrate
Question
Any person aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a policestation to record the information referred to in sub-section (1), may send the substance ofsuch information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, ifsatisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shalleither investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officersubordinate to him, in the manner provided by this Sanhita, and such officer shall have allthe powers of an officer in charge of the police station in relation to that offence failingwhich he may make an application under sub-section (3) of section 175 to the Magistrate
Solution
This passage appears to be outlining a procedure for someone who feels wronged by a police officer's refusal to record certain information. According to this, the person can send the information in writing and by post to the Superintendent of Police. If the Superintendent believes that the information indicates a cognizable offence, they can either investigate the case themselves or direct a subordinate to do so. This investigating officer would have all the powers of an officer in charge of a police station in relation to that offence. If this doesn't happen, the person can apply to the Magistrate under sub-section (3) of section 175.
Similar Questions
________ made while in the custody of police is inadmissible.AConfessionBAdmissionCDeclarationDDirect evidence
When the original document is a public record and is in the custody of a public officer, may secondary evidence be resorted to?Group of answer choicesYesNo
If you know or suspect an investigation is being planned or carried out or likely to be carried out, and you disclose the information to anyone or you falsify, conceal, destroy documentation relevant to the investigation.This is an example of what?Choisissez la meilleure optionNear missTipping offDisclosure of Financial crime controls
Question 1Sources of information include:1 pointWitnesses to an act of fraud.Surveillance by private detectives.Surveillance by police officers.All of the above2.Question 2
The creation of police professionalism addressed the corruption that concerned police departments regarding which of the following?Illegal behavior in return for goods or informationEstablishing an understanding who should have influence over policing practicesThe establishment of policies and procedures for policing practices that violated the lawThe establishment of police commissions that allowed for improper or corrupt policing practices
Upgrade your grade with Knowee
Get personalized homework help. Review tough concepts in more detail, or go deeper into your topic by exploring other relevant questions.