Under section 161 Cr.P.C., a police officer records the statements of the complainant and others with the evidences, recommends the judiciary to send the accused persons to jail. The Court sends them to jail. Within stipulated period, IO sends the chargesheet and the Court takes cognizance - in majority of the cases, this system works mechanically. With the new facts coming in light, the IO again records the statements of the complainant and others under section 161 Cr.P.C., with the evidences and put up his additional report under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C., the same court does not take action as per the findings. Why such discretion differently at both points? Can the earlier report be motivated one? Can the judiciary not commit the errors? Can it not improve itself? Recently, Supreme Court has recalled its own decision in one case. How should the Law Makers, Law Implementing Agencies/officers attached with such agencies and judiciary get motivated with the circumstances of each case when the law itself does not permit and treats everyone equal?
