Whether Investigating Officer can refresh his memory from contemporaneous record of what he had recorded during investigation,

Evidence — refreshing memory by Investigating Officer

Investigating Officer can refresh his memory from contemporaneous record of what he had recorded during investigation, while answering questions in court. 

State of Karnataka vs. K. Yarappa Reddy,
AIR 2000 SC 185 

The Supreme Court observed, in a case of murder, that the trial court cannot overlook the reality that an Investigating Officer comes to the court for giving evidence after conducting investigation in many other cases also in the meanwhile. Evidence giving process should not bog down to memory tests of witnesses. An Investigating Officer must answer the questions in Court, as far as possible, only with reference to what he had recorded during investigation. Such records are the contemporaneous entries made by him and hence for refreshing his memory it is always advisable that he looks into those records before answering any question. 

Sec. 159 of the Evidence Act is couched in a language recognising the aforesaid necessity. The section reads thus: “159. Refreshing memory— A witness may, while under examination, refresh his memory by referring to any writing made by himself at the time of the transaction concerning which he is questioned, or so soon afterwards that the Court considers it likely that the transaction was at that time fresh in his memory. The witness may also refer to any such writing made by any other person, and read by the witness within the time aforesaid, if when he read it he knew it to be correct.”

The objection of the defence counsel when Investigating Officer wanted to reply by referring to the records of investigation is, therefore, untenable and unjustified. The trial court should repel such objections.

Print Page