DEOKINANDAN Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question referred to this Full Bench is whether a village chowkidar appointed under the Act is a Police Officer within the meaning of Section 25, Evidence Act. Now obviously there are two views which are open. As the word "Police Officer" has not been defined in the Evidence Act, one may understand by it what is understood in common parlance as indicating an officer belonging to the police force, or one may refer to the Police Act and Police Regulations for the purpose of ascertaining who is a Police Officer. Under Act 20 of 1856 a body of persons called chowkidars were those whose number and grade of salary had to be fixed by Magistrates and whose appointments were made by Magistrates under the control of the Commissioner. Their appointment, suspension and dismissal were not in the hands of the superior police authorities. Act 5 of 1861 defined the word "police" as including all persons who were enrolled under that Act. The superior officers were mentioned in Section 4, and then Section 7 provided that the appointment of all officers, other than those mentioned in Section 4, shall rest with the I. G., D. I. G., A. I. G., and S.P. Section 21 made the Act inapplicable to any hereditary or other village Police Officer unless enrolled under the Act.

(2.) In these sections the officer was described as a Police Officer. In the last Section 47 there was a provision that the Local Government may declare that any authority exercised by the District Magistrate over "any village watchman or other village Police Officer" shall be exercised by the District Superintendent of Police. This last section indicated that a village watchman may well be a village Police Officer, but the words used were "Village Police Officer" and not simply Police Officer. Section 21 drew a distinction between hereditary or other village Police Officer and Police Officers. The former could not be enrolled as members of the police without their consent and the consent of those who had the right to nominate them. The Police Regulations, Part 3, para. 371, laid down that the police force consists of: (a) (i) Provincial Police, civil, armed or mounted, (ii) Government Railway Police appointed and enrolled under Act 5 of 1861 and (b) village chowkidars appointed under Act 16 of 1873 and not so enrolled. Paras. 372 and 373 however expressly show that village chowkidars are not regarded as officers of the force who come down up to the grade of constables only. In Section 45, Criminal P.C., Act 5 of 1898, village headman, village accountant, village watchman, village owner or occupier of land and the agent of any such owner or occupier of land, are bound to communicate to the nearest Magistrate or officer in charge of a police station information as regards certain particulars. The section as it stands would seem to suggest a distinction between a village watchman and a village police officer.

(3.) The scheme of these Acts also shows that a village watchman is nominated by the zamindars or the lambardar of the village, and then appointed by the Magistrate. Of course the nomination may not be accepted, but no one who has not been so nominated can be appointed a village watchman by the Magistrate. On the other hand police constables are appointed by the superior police authorities and not by the Magistracy. There is accordingly a distinction and the two belong to two different grades. It is also a fact that ordinarily a village watchman is a resident of the village who would be well known to the inhabitants and with whom they may well be familiar and intimate, with the result that they would not be afraid of him to the same degree as they would be of a police constable or police sub-inspector coming from the Police Station to make an investigation. It also appears that although the duties of the village watchman are like those of the other persons mentioned in Section 45, Criminal P.C. his powers also are in no sense wider than those conferred on such other persons. He is certainly not invested with other powers conferred upon police officers by the Criminal P.C. The Indian Evidence Act was passed in 1872, after the Police Act of 1861 was passed and the earlier Criminal P. C of 1861 was in. force. The contention of the learned Government Advocate ,that the words "police officer" in the Evidence Act should be understood in their technical meaning as disclosed by the Police Act, the Police Regulations and the Criminal P.C. is not without some force.