1

O.P. JINDAL GLOBAL UNIVERSITY,

SONIPAT
JINDAL GLOBAL LAW SCHOOL

Declaration:

We undertake that the coursework presented here is our own work and is, with the exception
of attributed quotations, written in our own words. All quotations have been placed within
quotation marks and referenced.

We have not copied or paraphrased the words of any author, published or unpublished,
without attribution.

Student Names and IDs: Vrinda Garg (18010718), Harshita Pareek(18010740) and
Yashovardhan Suri()

Course: Criminal Procedure of Law Section: B.B.A LL.B (B)

Date: 27th May 2020

Question:- (1) Please analyse the different stages/any specific stage of criminal trial, which
would be impacted by Covid-19. You are required to provide remedies/alternatives and best
practices. In the event you opine that Covid-19 does not impact any stage of the trial then
defend the existing procedure with your explanations. You are encouraged to use case laws
and illustrations of your own wherever necessary.
2

Protective measures by the Indian government to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is

heavily disrupting the criminal justice system. The Supreme Court, in a circular dated 26th

March 2020, decided to hear only ‘urgent cases’ via video call. This delay in hearing of not

urgent cases is not the only factor hindering the justice system, but the difficulty that the

police and judiciary are facing to conduct a free and fair criminal trial is one major

contributor to the hindrance. This article provides insight into a few parts of a criminal trial,

FIR, investigation, and bail, which are disrupted by the ongoing COVID-19 lockdown and

suggest some remedies that would be useful to carry on the steps as efficiently as possible in

these difficult times.

Since the lockdown, the police stations across India have observed a huge rise in the

number of FIRs being registered. The Delhi Police has reported a total of 66,000 FIRs, with

10,000 vehicles being impounded and 40 home quarantine violation FIRs till April 17 thafter

the lockdown.1 On 5thMay 2020, The Supreme Court of India rejected a plea seeking

quashing of FIRs for petty offences during the lockdown. This plea argued that Section 188

of the IPC is creating an undue pressure on the police workforce and is leading to mounting

of FIRs in the police station.2 The court gave the reasoning that if this is allowed then it will

be impossible to implement lockdown. One can agree with this reasoning because it is

important for citizens to adhere to the lockdown during these hard times. However, the

procedure of lodging FIRs in registering criminal cases is contradictory to the due process of

law.3 The police have skipped the part of filing complaints before magistrates and instead are

just registering FIRs for the lockdown violations. These proceedings are barred by Section

195 of CrPC which mandates taking cognizance of an offence under Section 188 of the IPC
1
PTI, Supreme Court rejects plea seeking quashing of FIRs for petty offences during COVID-19 lockdown,
ECONOMIC TIMES (May 05, 2020, 4:25 PM), https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-
nation/supreme-court-rejects-plea-seeking-quashing-of-firs-for-petty-offences-during-covid-19-
lockdown/articleshow/75553956.cms.
2
PTI, supra note 1.
3
NS Boparai, Due process ignored in FIRs for flouting lockdown, THE TRIBUNE (Apr. 24, 2020, 6:38 AM),
https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/due-process-ignored-in-firs-for-flouting-lockdown-75209
3

only by way of a police report or charge sheet.4 In the case of C. Munniappan v. State of

Tamil Nadu5, the Supreme Court has laid down some guidelines with respect to Section 188

of the IPC.  The court ruled that “law can be summarized to the effect that there must be a

complaint by the public servant whose lawful order has not been complied with. The

complaint must be in writing. The provisions of Section 195, CrPC, are mandatory. Non-

compliance with it would vitiate the persecution and all other consequential orders. The court

cannot assume the cognizance of the case without such complaint. In the absence of such

complaint, the trial and conviction will be void ab initio being without jurisdiction.”6

The coronavirus is also used as an advantage by the police officials because the courts

are unable to monitor their actions. The District Court of Patiala, on an allegation by a student

that her phone was seized by the police not following due-procedure,  said that “The court is

of the considered opinion that due to current circumstances ensuing in the nation due to

pandemic created by Covid-19, it is not feasible to call for weekly reports and to monitor

police in such times.”7 The arrest of Safoora Zargar, who was accused by the police for

instigating protests against CAA, raises many questions on how the stage of filing a FIR has

been misused by the police under the garb of COVID-19. She, along with many other

students, was arrested based on an FIR that did not even have her name as an accused. 8 When

the court slammed the police for not issuing her bail, the police went on to manipulate the

FIR against students like her so as to deny them bail. 

Due to the ongoing lockdown, there have been many hindrances in conducting an

investigation. The court and the legislature do not want to recognize the situation that the

4
NS Boparai supra note 3.
5
C. Munniappan v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2010) 9 SCC 567 (India).
6
C. Munniappan v. State of Tamil Nadu, supra note 5.
7
Sruthisagar Yamunan, As Delhi Police crack down on student leaders, courts cite lockdown to justify lack of
scrutiny, SCROLL.IN (May 26, 2020, 9:54 PM), https://scroll.in/article/960591/as-delhi-police-crack-down-on-
student-leaders-court-cites-lockdown-to-justify-lack-of-scrutiny.
8
Sruthisagar Yamunan, supra note 7.
4

police is dealing with and, regardless, wish to impose strict measures. In a Suo Moto Writ-

Petition9, the Supreme Court of India recognized the challenges faced by the country due to

the COVID-19 lockdown. The court ordered the extension of the limitation period for

litigants to file petition, suits, applications, appeals, and all other documents under both

general and special law of limitation. But the court said nothing about the extension of the

limitation period for filing police reports under Section 167 of the CrPC that deals with the

filling of the police report after investigation. According to the section, the police have to file

a report within 90 days, and the offense has to be punishable with death, imprisonment for

life or imprisonment not less than ten years or 60 days for any other crime. In the case of

Settu v. The State10, the police failed to file the police report, which leads to the accused filing

for a default bail. He was charged with robbery, and even if it is classified as the aggravated

type of robbery under section 392 of the IPC, the remand period expired on the 90th day after

his remand fell i.e., on 18th April 2020. Justice G R Swaminathan presided over the single

bench and had to grant him bail under Section 167 of the CrPC. The police argued that they

could not complete the investigation within 90 days because of the coronavirus lockdown.

Since the supreme court had extended the limitation period for the litigants, it must apply to

the filling of the police reports as well because just like the litigants, police are also facing

problems. But the court disagreed with the police and noted that “Personal liberty, as stated in

Article 21, is too precious a fundamental right. It is not as if crimes have not taken place

during these pandemic times. Arrests are also being made, and the accused are being

remanded. Therefore, the respondent is not justified in citing the closure of the courts and the

general extension of the limitation period"11. 

10

11
5

Taxation and Other Laws Ordinance, 202012, was bought by the Central Government

to extend the period of filing and compliances under various taxation and regulatory laws.

There is no mention of relaxation in filing police reports under section 167 of CRPC. This

indicates that the legislature has no intention to provide relaxation to the police to complete

investigation. In another case of Mohammed Ali v. The State of Kerala13, police failed to file a

report as per section 167. In this case, police argued that although the investigation was

complete, a police report could not be submitted as the magistrate’s court was not working

due to the lockdown.

The purpose of the law of bail is to devise a system where the maximum number of

accused can be released from police and judicial custody without endangering the objective

of arrest and trials. The recent pandemic has critically affected and hindered our judicial

system and forced courts to enforce special measures to tackle COVID-19. The prisons in

India are overcrowded and congested, which have made them very susceptible to the spread

of coronavirus. On 23rd March 2020, the apex court took Suo Moto cognizance of this

matter. It directed high courts around the country to form high powered committees to look

into this matter and determine the class of prisoners which could be released to decongest the

prisons.14 These committees throughout the country have passed direction relaxing the

guidelines for granting interim bail. The sureties of prisoners realized by magistrate have also

been modified to personal bond in case the accused is not able to furnish sureties during the

lockdown. On 8th April 2020, the High Power Committee of the Delhi High Court, headed

by Justice Hima Kohli, further relaxed conditions to grant emergency bail to prisoners, but

these relaxations have done little to spur the problem. 15 In some cases, in the Delhi High
12

13

14

15
Karan Tripathi High Powered Committee Headed by Justice Hima Kohli Further Relaxes Criteria for
Emergency Bail for Delhi Prisoners, LIVELAW (Apr 8, 2020, 11:16 AM), https://www.livelaw.in/news-
updates/high-powered-committee-headed-by-justice-hima-kohli-further-relaxes-criteria-for-emergency-bail-for-
delhi-prisoners-154941.
6

Court, the bail applications were adjourned without even addressing arguments due to the

unavailability of lawyers and insufficient/incorrect status report due to the absence of an

investigating officer.16 Inaccessibility of proper video conferencing technology has further

hindered the situation. The judge in the Rajasthan High Court adjourned five bail applications

stating ‘hearing of so many counsels simultaneously even by video conferencing is not

feasible.’17

Though steps taken by the courts are necessary to protect the fundamental rights of

prisoners, it can also be argued that relaxation in granting bail can hinder many ongoing

investigations and jeopardize trials. The committees set by the high courts have made certain

expiations by not including habitual offenders, accused facing heinous charges and crimes

punishable by more than seven years. However, there remains some risk while realizing some

undertrials. The situation got more problematic when Justice Garg of Rajasthan high court

granted bail to a juvenile, accused of committing gang-rape under Section 376D of IPC

setting aside the order of Juvenile justice board and special POSCO court stating that gravity

of the offense committed cannot be a ground to decline bail to a juvenile in current

circumstances.18 Furthermore, the nationwide lockdown has also hampered the proceeding for

granting bail for accused residing outside the state limits. The Bombay High Court in Sopan

Ramesh Lanjekar v..The State of Maharashtra 19 declined a regular bail application stating

that the release of the accused at the cost of a breach of the lockdown and risking his life

cannot be regarded as urgent. The Delhi high court also denied the release of a prisoner as his

16
Karan Tripathi, Justice In Lockdown: Concerning Trend In Bail Hearings Before Trial Courts, LIVELAW
(May 3, 2020, 9:54 AM), https://www.livelaw.in/columns/justice-in-lockdown-concerning-trend-in-bail-
hearings-before-trial-courts-156131?infinitescroll=1.
17
Mahal Jain, Hearing "So Many" Counsel By Video Conferencing Not Feasible, Says Raj HC; Adjourns Bail
Applications, LIVELAW (Apr 14, 2020, 5:21 PM), https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/hearing-so-many-
counsel-by-video-conferencing-not-feasible-says-raj-hc-adjourns-bail-applications-155228.
18
Live Law News Network, "Lawyers Abstaining From Work In View Of COVID-19 Pandemic": Rajasthan
HC Grants Bail In The Absence Of Lawyers In Many Cases, LIVELAW (Apr 16, 2020, 1:57 PM)
https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/lawyers-abstaining-from-work-in-view-of-covid-19-pandemic-rajasthan-
hc-grants-bail-in-the-absence-of-lawyers-in-many-cases-155327?infinitescroll=1.
19
Sopan Ramesh Lanjekar v. The State of Maharashtra, (2020) SCC 468 (India).
7

residence was in the containment zone and releasing him in the given circumstances would

further endanger his life.20

These main issues identified in certain stages of the CrPC can be eliminated to a great

extent if certain remedies are considered and applied correctly. 

The possible solution to the many FIRs filed under Section 188 is to establish special

courts to dispose of these cases quickly. It will help the already burdened judicial system

focus on other cases and not deviate from cases in which they are already working. As it

might be difficult for the courts to keep a close eye on the police officials, then, therefore

they should issue some guidelines to minimize arrest at the moment. Detention is not only

disadvantageous to the arrested person because of them not getting a fair chance to meet their

lawyers, but also creating an unprecedented chaos in the jails 

As far as investigations are concerned, filing of the police report should be extended

like all other limitation periods, and bail should not be denied or accepted based on filing or

non-filing of the police report. As held by Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan, in the case of

Mohammed Ali v State of Kerala 21, Section 167 of CrPC does not prevent the police from

conducting the investigation but only bans the detention of the accused. This will ensure that

there is no bias in the court decisions and that the investigation is done in a free and fair

manner and not in a hurry. Another way to ensure a free and fair investigation is to separate

the law and order duties from an investigation just like the Delhi police 22 are planning to do.

Providing the on-field officers with better safety gear and creating a division between the

officers stationed in a police station and the on-field officers will make the process of

conducting an investigation efficient. The North African nation Tunisia has deployed a police
20
Karan Tripathi, Delhi HC Refuses To Release A Prisoner As His Residence Was In Notified Containment
Zone, LIVELAW (May 6, 2020, 4:45 PM), https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/delhi-hc-refuses-to-release-a-
prisoner-as-his-residence-was-in-notified-containment-zone-156317.
21

22
8

robot23. Such technology can be adopted for conducting some parts of the inquiry to ensure

social distancing. Recording of statements by the magistrate can itself be done by a robot

following all the requirements mentioned in Section 164 CrPC, and FIR under Section 154

can be registered by the artificial intelligence robot and not by a police officer. Also, some

awareness should be created regarding the e-filing of FIRs. 

Though essential, the remedies implemented by the Supreme Court will not be in the

interest of prisoners or the general public. As many under trial prisoners have their place of

residence outside state borders and residence of some prisoners could also be within the

containment zone, it would put the lives of prisoners and those employed to take them back at

risk. Moreover, releasing thousands of inmates would also amount to breaching the order of

lockdown and could increase the pressure on police forces. The Haryana government's

approach to prepare a block-wise time table for services relating to food and other necessities

within prisons and Uttarakhand government decision to separate groups of prisoners who are

more vulnerable such as old age prisoners with respiratory diseases would be more helpful.

The state government can also shift prisoners from overcrowded prisoners to less crowded

ones and look for places around prisoners that can be temporally used as prisoners and only

releases undertrials on bail in extreme emergent cases.

The coronavirus pandemic has shaken our judicial and executive system, critically

hampering the procedures for criminal trials. Though both the systems are trying to function

efficiently while maintaining social distancing norms, with a substantial increase in FIR, the

overburdened police are struggling to investigate while maintaining law and order during the

lockdown. The increases in interim bail pleas due to low hygiene and safety standards in

overcrowded prisons have also overloaded the courts. As the virtual courts have not been

fully able to replace open court hearings, all the ongoing criminal trials have been delayed,

23
9

and even the urgent matters coming before the judge are getting adjourned due to

unavailability to lawyers. Our judicial system has become inadequate and inefficient during

the pandemic denying the fundamental right of a free and fair trial to accused guaranteed by

the constitution of India