In India's legal system, the Case Diary stands as a cornerstone of criminal investigation. Governed by Section 192 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, BNSS, 2023, this document, meticulously maintained by the Investigating Officer (IO), serves as a chronological record of the investigation's progression. From the initial receipt of information to the details of locations visited, exhibits seized, and witness statements recorded under Section 180 BNSS, the Case Diary paints a comprehensive picture of the investigative process.

This raises a critical question: Is the IO permitted to edit the Case Diary once entries have been made?
The fundamental principle underpinning the Case Diary is the preservation of an accurate and contemporaneous account of the investigation. Consequently, any form of alteration that obscures the original entry - erasing, overwriting, or making significant changes - is strictly prohibited and carries severe legal consequences.

However, investigations are dynamic. New information emerges, requiring the IO to adapt and incorporate these findings. Therefore, the IO can make further entries or clarifications. The ethical and legally sound approach involves adding fresh, dated entries that supplement or provide additional context to the existing record.

Acceptable and Unacceptable Practices:

To clarify the boundaries, let's examine permissible and impermissible actions concerning the Case Diary:

Acceptable Practices:

• Making New, Dated Entries: As the investigation advances, the IO is obligated to record new discoveries, actions taken, and information received through subsequent, dated entries.
• Adding Clarifications: In cases of initial ambiguity or the need for further details regarding a prior entry, the IO can create a new entry to clarify the matter. This new entry should explicitly reference the original entry and clearly state the date of the clarification.
• Inserting Witness Statements: The inclusion of witness statements recorded under Section 180 BNSS is a mandatory requirement for the Case Diary.

Unacceptable Practices (Editing that Obscures the Original Record):

• Erasing or Overwriting Original Entries: This practice is strictly forbidden as it destroys the original record and casts doubt on the investigation's integrity.
• Using Correction Fluid or Similar Methods: Concealing original entries using correction fluid or similar techniques is viewed as tampering with the official record.
• Backdating Entries: All entries must accurately reflect the true date and time when the information was recorded or the action was taken.
   

The Legal Ramifications of Improper Alterations:

Tampering with the Case Diary carries significant legal ramifications:

• Loss of Credibility: Proven instances of improper alteration can severely damage the IO's credibility and weaken the prosecution's entire case.
• Adverse Inference: Courts may draw an adverse inference against the prosecution if the Case Diary exhibits signs of tampering.
• Cross-Examination and Contradiction: Under Section 148 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023, if the IO uses the Case Diary to refresh their memory in court, the accused has the right to cross-examine them on the contents, including any inconsistencies or suspicious alterations. Furthermore, if the court uses the diary to contradict the IO (Section 192(5) BNSS), the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam apply.
• Potential for Perjury or Fabrication Charges: In extreme cases, if the alteration is intended to mislead the court or fabricate evidence, the IO may face departmental action or even criminal charges.
• Weakening the Prosecution's Case: Discrepancies or signs of tampering in the Case Diary can provide the defense with strong grounds to challenge the evidence and the fairness of the investigation.

Judicial Views on Case Diary Edits and Investigative Integrity:
While specific, singular landmark rulings directly addressing the impermissibility of obscuring original entries in a case diary might be elusive, the consistent judicial emphasis on the sanctity and accuracy of investigation records implicitly prohibits such practices. Courts, interpreting Section 192 BNSS 2023, have repeatedly stressed the importance of a contemporaneous and truthful account of the investigation for ensuring a fair trial.

Any demonstrable tampering, including erasing or overwriting original entries, would likely be viewed with severe disapproval, potentially leading to the investigating officer's credibility being impeached, adverse inferences drawn against the prosecution, and the overall reliability of the investigation being questioned, thereby impacting the judicial outcome. The underlying principle remains that the case diary, while not substantive evidence, must reflect an untainted record of the investigative process for the court to repose its trust in the evidence presented.

A contemporaneous case diary is a crucial record in criminal investigations, where investigating officers meticulously document their day-to-day activities, findings, and observations as the investigation unfolds; the emphasis on "contemporaneous" highlights the importance of recording information promptly, as events occur or very soon thereafter, to ensure accuracy, minimize memory distortion, and preserve the integrity of the investigative process. This practice ensures that the case diary serves as a reliable and truthful account, reflecting an untainted record of the investigation for the court's scrutiny and facilitating a fair trial.

Conclusion:
In summary, while the IO is expected to continuously update the Case Diary as the investigation unfolds, they are ethically and legally prohibited from editing previous entries in a way that obscures the original record. All new information or clarifications must be added as fresh, dated entries to ensure the transparency and integrity of the investigation. The Case Diary serves as a crucial document for the court to assess the progress and fairness of the investigation, and any tampering can have severe and detrimental consequences for the prosecution.

Written By: Md.Imran Wahab, IPS, IGP, Provisioning, West Bengal
Email: imranwahab216@gmail.com, Ph no: 9836576565