19s1 arrest of the persons alleged to have been concerned Macherla with the crime. Even in cases which are not, in the Hanumantha Rao first i_nstance, of cognizable nature, it becomes the duty and e.thers of a police officer to investigate such a case if he is so The State of ordered by a competent magistrate, taking cognizance Andhra Pradesh of the offence under s. 190 of the Code. In all such Sinha J. cases, it becomes the duty of a police officer in-charge of a police station, or of a superior officer if deputed to investigate a case, to follow the procedure laid down in Chapter XIV of the Code. Under s. 169 of the Code, if, as a result of the investigation under Chapter XIV, the police officer making the investigation, comes to the conclusion that there is no sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion to justify the forwarding of the accused to a magistrate, he has to release the accused person if in custody. If, on the other hand, on such an investigation, it appears to the investigating officer that there is. sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion, it becomes his duty to forward the accused to a competent magistrate to try the accused or to commit him for trial. Section 173 of the Code requires the investigation to be concluded without any unnecessary delay and the submission of a report containing the result of the investigation, to a competent magistrate. After the submission of the police report, the police officer in-charge of a police station, before the commencement of the inquiry or trial by a magistrate, has to furnish to the accused, free of cost, a copy of the report aforesaid, of the first information report and of all other documents or relevant extracts thereof, on which prosecution proposes to rely, including statements and confessions, if any, recorded under s. 164, and the statements recorded under 3ub-s. 3 of s. 161, of all persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as witnesses.
