Introduction
Speedy justice is fundamental to a fair and effective criminal justice system. It ensures that justice is not delayed, thereby upholding the legal maxim that justice delayed is justice denied. In murder cases, timely investigations and prosecutions are crucial for maintaining public trust in the judicial system. Delays can lead to loss of evidence, witness unavailability, prolonged suffering for victims’ families and potential injustice for accused individuals. Investigating murder cases in India presents significant challenges, including but not limited to overburdened police forces, inefficient forensic infrastructure, high pendency rates in courts, witness intimidation and corruption. The police force in India is often understaffed and overworked, making it difficult to allocate sufficient resources and attention to each murder investigation. Investigating officers must handle multiple cases simultaneously, leading to inefficiencies and delays in gathering crucial evidence. Moreover, forensic laboratories across the country suffer from inadequate facilities, outdated technology and a shortage of trained professionals, resulting in prolonged forensic analysis and delayed reports critical for case progress. The Indian judiciary faces a significant backlog of cases, with courts struggling to clear pending murder trials. This backlog further exacerbates delays in justice delivery, prolonging the suffering of victims’ families and increasing the chances of evidence degradation or witness unavailability. Witness intimidation is another major hurdle, as key witnesses often fear retaliation from accused individuals or influential parties, leading to reluctance to testify or even hostility during trials. This fear, combined with societal pressure and lack of proper witness protection mechanisms, weakens the prosecution’s case and hampers justice.
Additionally, corruption and political interference create further roadblocks in murder investigations. Sometimes, law enforcement agencies face undue pressure to manipulate evidence, delay proceedings or even protect influential suspects. Bureaucratic red tape also complicates the process, as permissions, approvals and procedural formalities consume valuable time that could otherwise be spent on active investigation. These systemic issues collectively slow the investigative process, ultimately affecting the timely delivery of justice and diminishing public confidence in the criminal justice system. The efficiency of the investigating officer plays a pivotal role in determining the pace and outcome of a criminal investigation. An investigating officer with thorough training, adequate resources and an unwavering commitment to justice can significantly reduce delays in murder case investigations. By adopting modern forensic techniques, ensuring proper documentation and coordinating effectively with judicial and forensic bodies, an investigating officer can expedite case resolution while maintaining the investigation’s integrity.
Research Questions Addressed in the Study
This study aims to analyse the role of investigating officers in murder case investigations, focusing on how their efficiency makes an impact on case resolution. The effectiveness of an investigating officer can determine the speed at which crucial evidence is collected, suspects are interrogated and forensic reports are integrated into the investigation. By assessing the functions and responsibilities of an investigating officer, this study seeks to understand how their approach influences the overall judicial process. Furthermore, the study will identify various factors that affect the timely disposal of murder cases. These factors include legal provisions, procedural delays, infrastructural limitations and systemic inefficiencies within the criminal justice system. Understanding these factors will help recognize gaps that lead to delays and inefficiencies, which in turn hinder the justice process. Additionally, this study will examine the state-specific challenges in Assam’s criminal justice system that contribute to delays in murder case investigations. Assam, like many other states in India, faces unique legal and administrative challenges, including inadequate police training, delayed forensic processing and geographical difficulties in evidence collection. By focusing on these issues, the study will highlight key areas for reform that can contribute to a more efficient justice delivery system.
The following research questions will be explored in detail to guide the study. First, how does an investigating officer’s efficiency have an impact on the speed of case disposal? By evaluating the role of the investigating officer, this question will help understand how effective investigative strategies, prompt decision-making, and proper coordination with forensic and legal authorities contribute to reducing case delays. Second, what are the major bottlenecks in Assam’s criminal justice system that hinder timely murder investigations and prosecutions? This question explores administrative, legal and infrastructural obstacles that affect the smooth functioning of the justice system in the state. Issues such as police understaffing, resource constraints and procedural delays will be examined to determine their impact on the pace of investigations. Lastly, what measures can be implemented to improve the investigation process and ensure swift justice? The study will propose practical reforms, such as better training for investigating officers, improved forensic infrastructure and efficient case management techniques. By examining best practices from other jurisdictions and implementing modern investigative tools, the study recommends effective strategies to enhance the overall efficiency of murder case investigations in Assam and across India. By addressing these questions, this study seeks to provide empirical insights into the effectiveness of murder case investigations in India, focusing on Assam. The findings may serve as a basis for recommending policy changes and procedural reforms to enhance the efficiency of the Indian criminal justice system. The ultimate goal is to create a framework that allows quicker, more effective investigations and ensures justice is served promptly and fairly.
Importance of Study
Delays in the criminal justice system have long been perceived as a serious problem not easily controlled by the executive, legislative or judicial branches. There are many reasons for this concern about delays in the criminal justice system, which influence its effectiveness. The problem of delay in the disposal of cases is not new and is as old as the law itself. The problem has assumed such a gigantic proportion that unless it is solved speedily and effectively, it will soon completely crush the whole edifice of the criminal justice delivery system. The problem of delay and its increasingly horrifying dimensions are widely recognized, but there is little data-driven research on heinous offences like murder that has quantified the delay or diagnosed its causes. Inadequate research on delay in murder investigation is symptomatic of a bigger problem, and the in-depth empirical study of the role of investigating officers in the speedy disposal of murder investigations in the State of Assam is still struggling. Police have an important role in the criminal justice process in India as the investigation is the backbone of the fair and speedy justice delivered following the process of the criminal justice system, but there are several problems faced or questions raised on the investigation done, which leads to delays in the murder investigation, particularly in the State of Assam. Moreover, the study also examines the recently introduced criminal law, i.e. the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS),Footnote 1 designed to expedite justice system investigations. By analysing these new legal provisions, the study aims to provide an in-depth understanding of their impact on the investigation process.
Literature Review
The book Police Investigation: Powers, Tactics and Techniques by Sithannan (Reference Sithannan2016) has made a genuine effort to cover all facets of the police investigation by specifically highlighting the various stages that investigating officers must navigate while fulfilling their duties to attain a successful outcome. The book concentrates on specific topics such as filing a First Information Report (FIR), the nature of the offence, its modus operandi, evidence collection and the inference of motives to ensure a comprehensive investigation.
The book Law of Speedy Trial in India by Arora (Reference Arora2006) deals extensively with the speedy trial law in India. It covers every aspect, starting with the evolution of the state, the basic notion of law, crime and justice and provisions of the criminal procedure code concerning the speedy trial and case laws on speedy trials. This book also deals with themes of criminal justice, such as the historical and social framework in which crime control agencies have evolved certain methods within the criminal justice system to guide the decision-making bodies.
The book Homicide Investigation – A Practical Handbook by Rapp (Reference Rapp1989) serves as a practical guideline and investigative guide for police officers conducting homicide investigations. It offers a thorough working understanding of how police investigators conduct homicide investigations for civilians. It sets out ways to increase the chances of catching the offender and offers a foundation for evaluating those possibilities.
Prasad (Reference Prasad2017), in his paper “Criminal Justice System in India Delay Problems: An Investigation”, has highlighted that the way police investigations are conducted is faulty as the system adopted by police for doing an investigation into the case has now become obsolete. Due to the application of age-old investigative techniques, police do not collect evidence effectively and quickly, resulting in delayed investigations and, ultimately, delays in the disposal of cases. Nowadays, due to technological development, criminals are committing crimes in a very planned manner using scientifically developed measures, and such type of criminal activity may be brought under through scanning, and the guilty individuals can be identified if scientific investigations like narco-analysis brain mapping and polygraphy are adopted.
Kachina (Reference Kachina2020), in her paper titled “Assessment on Delay of Investigation in Murder Cases: Case Study of Katavi”, attempts to discuss delays of investigation in murder cases and their impacts on the provision of justice in Tanzania. She says that the police force has an inescapable responsibility to investigate not only murder cases but also other cases before they are sent to court for trial. In this understanding, the police investigation assignment should be completed on time. However, there have been some delays attributed to many factors, most of which this research work has addressed in some depth. The work also reveals through the research findings that investigation delays have far-reaching effects. The effects of such delays indicate that they are an affront to a speedy criminal justice process. Finally, recommendations aimed at getting rid of those delays are made.
Narula and Gupta (Reference Narula and Gupta2021), in their paper “Need of the Hour: Reforming the Indian Criminal Justice System”, reported on the current state of India’s criminal justice system where arrest numbers are in the millions, jails are overcrowded, largely with undertrials, and courts are swamped with outstanding cases. Furthermore, the legal process takes time and is often directed towards the offender’s interests and rights rather than the victims’. They also highlighted the present criminal justice system, which has many defects and loopholes, rendering it inefficient in providing swift and efficient justice and ensuring the certainty of punishment for criminals. Therefore, they opined that it is necessary to introduce systematic reforms in various aspects of the criminal justice system and offer a reformed look that maintains and protects the rule of law.
Andrii and Andrii (Reference Andrii and Andrii2022), in their paper titled “Forensics Framework for Murder Investigation”, talk about the fundamentals of forensic homicide investigation techniques, and outline typical investigative problems and how to solve them. It is established that two areas of inquiry should be considered while determining the identification of the murderer: the first is to gather information based on real and imagined traces, and the second is to research the identification of the criminal during the pre-trial inquiry. The approach for homicide investigations is based on common investigative circumstances created at the beginning of a criminal case. The acts of the murderer, the murder’s location, timing, circumstances and the nature of the source information all play a role in typical early investigative scenarios.
Legal Framework and Procedural Aspects of Criminal Justice
This section examines the role of police in the criminal justice system and the legal provisions ensuring a speedy trial. The initial subsection highlights the police’s responsibilities in law enforcement, crime prevention, investigation and maintaining public order, emphasizing their role in upholding justice. The later subsection focuses on key provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC)Footnote 2 and the BNSS that mandate swift legal proceedings, including timelines for arrests, investigations and case resolution, ensuring timely justice and procedural fairness.
The police serve as the backbone of the criminal justice system in India, playing a pivotal role in maintaining law and order, investigating crimes, apprehending offenders and ensuring justice is served. Their responsibilities include providing immediate assistance to victims, taking preventive measures against crime, conducting fair investigations and enforcing laws. As a key law enforcement agency, the police are entrusted with four fundamental duties: enforcing laws, preventing crimes, responding to emergencies and offering support services. A transparent and impartial investigation is crucial for upholding justice, as the criminal justice system functions through the apprehension, prosecution, conviction and sentencing of offenders. Despite being one of the three main pillars of the justice system, along with the judiciary and correctional institutions, the credibility of police investigations is often questioned, leading to demands for impartial investigative agencies to ensure fair justice.
Evolution and Role of Police in India
The term “police” originates from the Latin word politia, meaning “civil administration”, derived from the Greek word polis, meaning “city”. Over time, politia evolved into the French word police, which is now widely used to refer to law enforcement agencies worldwide. In India, the concept of policing predates British rule, with justice and law enforcement deeply rooted in ancient traditions since the Vedic era. However, the British introduced a formal police structure in 1792, which took shape after the Revolt of 1857 through the Police Act of 1861.Footnote 3 This act established an organized policing system, which remained largely unchanged despite India’s independence in 1947. The Indian government later introduced police reforms through state police commissions and legislative amendments, yet the foundational structure continues to rest on the Police Act of 1861 and the Police Commission Report of 1902–03 (Indian Police Commission 1903). The Malimath Committee on Criminal Justice Reform (Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System 2003) highlighted the critical role of police in combating crime and terrorism. As the most visible arm of governance, the police act as the link between the state and its citizens. However, effective crime control requires seamless coordination between police, courts and correctional institutions rather than reliance solely on law enforcement.
Although the CrPC does not define “police”, the Police Act of 1861 provides a legal framework for their appointment, functions and powers. Under this act, all persons enrolled as police officers are vested with specific duties, including maintaining law and order, preventing crime and enforcing laws. Both the central and state governments have the authority to regulate police forces. In Prakash Singh and others v. Union of India and others,Footnote 4 the Supreme Court issued landmark guidelines for police reforms, emphasizing the need for restructuring and improving efficiency in law enforcement.
Police Organization and Powers
The Act of 1861 remains the foundation of India’s police system, defining law enforcement’s organizational structure and powers. Section 2 of the act mandates state governments to establish police forces, treating them as a single entity under their control. The hierarchy includes the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) at the top, followed by Deputy Inspectors-General, Assistant Inspectors-General, and Superintendents of Police. Section 3 places police administration under state governments, while Section 5 empowers them to regulate the IGP’s authority. Additionally, Section 7 grants senior officers the power to dismiss, suspend or demote subordinate officers for misconduct. Upon appointment, police officers receive a certificate of authority under Section 8, enabling them to exercise their legal powers. In times of public unrest, Section 17 allows the appointment of special police officers with the same powers as regular officers. However, Section 20 restricts officers from exceeding the authority granted under the act. India’s policing system consists of multiple agencies with specific jurisdictions, including the State Police (governed by the Police Act, 1861), the Central Bureau of Investigation (under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946),Footnote 5 the National Investigation Agency (established under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008),Footnote 6 and Special Armed Forces (regulated under various armed forces laws). These agencies coordinate to enforce law and order, with responsibilities varying based on the nature and severity of crimes.
Investigation Process and Powers of Police
Investigation is a crucial aspect of the criminal justice system, initiated by the police upon receiving information about a crime. As defined in Section 2(h) of the CrPC or Section 2 (j) of the BNSS, an investigation includes all proceedings undertaken by law enforcement for evidence collection. A proper investigation follows a systematic process involving crime scene visits, fact verification, suspect identification, witness examination, evidence collection and case assessment. The Supreme Court has outlined key investigative steps, ensuring that cases are built on solid evidence before a charge sheet is filed under Section 173 of the CrPC or Section 193 of the BNSS for trial. Police investigations are governed by the Indian Police Act of 1861 and the CrPC of 1973, with officers responsible for collecting evidence, maintaining fairness and proving cases beyond a reasonable doubt. The nature of justice, whether retributive, deterrent, corrective or reformative, depends on the severity of the crime and the investigation’s findings. The process begins when police receive information about a crime through an FIR in cognizable offences, victim complaints or suo motu action. Their powers include crime scene visits, witness examinations, evidence collection, searches, arrests, statement recordings and charge sheet filings. The CrPC (Sections 154–173) or BNSS (Sections 173–193) provides a detailed framework ensuring due process is followed. While magistrates oversee cases, they do not interfere with police investigations. A police officer’s key duties include registering FIRs, documenting crime reports, visiting crime scenes, securing evidence, arresting suspects and producing them in court within 24 hours. Investigations must be fair and thorough, culminating in a charge sheet submission to the court. Additionally, police work closely with the judiciary to assist in prosecution and ensure justice. However, effective policing requires coordination between law enforcement, the courts and correctional institutions to uphold the rule of law and maintain public trust. A transparent, efficient, well-organized investigation process is essential for justice and social order.
Provisions in the CrPC/BNSS Relating to Speedy Investigation
Several provisions in the CrPC and BNSS emphasize the need for speedy investigations to ensure efficient justice delivery.
Arrest and Production Before Magistrate
Under Section 56 of the CrPC/Section 57 of the BNSS, a person arrested without a warrant must be produced before a magistrate or the officer in charge of a police station without unnecessary delay. Section 57 of the CrPC/Section 58 of the BNSS further restricts the detention of an arrested person beyond 24 hours, excluding travel time to the Magistrate’s Court. Similarly, Section 76 of the CrPC/Section 78 of the BNSS mandates that a person arrested under a warrant be presented before the relevant court without undue delay, with a 24-hour time limit, excluding travel time.
Investigation and Reporting
According to Section 157 of the CrPC/Section 176 of the BNSS, the officer in charge of a police station must immediately report the commission of an offence to the magistrate. If full compliance is not possible, reasons must be stated and a fortnightly report must be sent. The BNSS additionally mandates that for offences punishable with seven years or more, a forensic expert must visit the crime scene, and the entire process should be videographed. In cases where forensic facilities are unavailable, state governments must notify alternative arrangements.
Custodial Detention and Investigation Timeline
Under Section 167 of the CrPC/Section 187 of the BNSS, if an investigation cannot be completed within 24 hours, the police must submit a diary entry to the nearest judicial magistrate. The law restricts custodial detention beyond 90 days for offences punishable by death, life imprisonment or imprisonment of 10 years or more, and 60 days for other offences.
Completion of Investigation
According to Section 173 of the CrPC/Section 193 of the BNSS, every investigation must be completed without unnecessary delay. The officer in charge must submit a police report to the magistrate. Cases of rape (under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012Footnote 7 ) must be investigated within two months from the date of information registration. The police must also inform the victim or informant about the investigation’s progress via electronic communication within 90 days. A superior officer may review the report and direct further investigation, which must be completed within 90 days, extendable with court permission.
Supply of Police Reports and Documents
Under Section 207 of the CrPC/Section 230 of the BNSS, the magistrate must provide the accused and the victim with copies of the police report, FIR, recorded statements, confessions and other relevant documents within 14 days of the accused’s production or appearance, ensuring transparency and a speedy trial.
Materials and Methods
The study follows an empirical approach, incorporating field research, case study analysis and interviews with key stakeholders involved in murder investigations. Data were collected through primary and secondary sources to ensure a comprehensive understanding. Primary data were gathered through interviews with investigating officers, providing first-hand insights into the challenges and best practices in handling murder cases. Meanwhile, secondary data were sourced from court records,Footnote 8 National Crime Records BureauFootnote 9 reports and legal texts (Anto Reference Anto2021; Feltes Reference Feltes1992; Jindal and Agrawal Reference Jindal and Agrawal2021; Kumar Reference Kumar2012; Mann Reference Mann2017; Myneni Reference Myneni2024; Sarathe Reference Sarathe2019; Saravanan Reference Saravanan2012; Shakya and Singh Reference Shakya and Singh2021; Taxmann 2024; Tripathi and Tripathi Reference Tripathi and Tripathi2019), offering statistical and legal perspectives on case disposal trends. The sampling and scope of the study focus on murder cases in Assam over the past 10 years, allowing for an analysis of patterns in investigation efficiency. To enhance the depth of the study, selected case studies include both fast-tracked and delayed murder cases, enabling a comparative assessment of factors influencing the speed of justice delivery. This approach provides a balanced perspective on the role of investigating officers and the challenges they face in ensuring the timely resolution of murder cases.
Method of Primary Data Collection
The questionnaire was employed to gather insights from investigating officers across Assam. A structured questionnaire was created through physical (hardcopy) questionnaires and online forms (Google Forms) to ensure broader participation and convenience. A total of 104 valid responses were received from different police stations across Assam. The researchers ensured that all responses were provided voluntarily, in a sound state of mind and with full knowledge of their professional role in expediting murder investigations. The selection aimed to represent diverse experiences and operational challenges faced by officers handling murder investigations in the state.
Statistical Analysis
The χ 2 test for independence tests whether two categorical variables are statistically related. Here, we used the χ 2 test to analyse: (i) whether receiving forensic training correlates with the timely submission of reports; and (ii) whether there is a significant association between consultation with public prosecutors and timely charge sheet filing. In both cases, the null hypothesis (H 0) was assigned as the two variables are independent (no relationship), and the alternative hypothesis (H 1) where the two variables are related. If the p-value is < 0.05, we reject H 0 and conclude a significant relationship. Cramér’s V measures the association between two categorical variables, used when data are in a contingency table format (e.g. yes/no responses). It ranges from 0 (no association) to 1 (strong association). Cramér’s V analysis for the associations between (i) forensic training and timely submission of forensic reports and (ii) consultation with public prosecutors and timely charge sheet filing was carried out.
Results
Survey Analysis on the Role of Investigating Officers in Speedy Disposal of Murder Cases in Assam
Here, we analyse the role of investigating officers in ensuring the speedy disposal of murder cases in Assam, focusing on factors affecting investigation timelines, procedural efficiency and legal compliance. It examines challenges faced by officers, including resource constraints, forensic support and judicial coordination.
Training and Expertise in Modern Investigation
The survey findings indicate that most (88%) of the investigating officers have specialized training in advanced, modern investigative techniques relevant to murder cases. This training is likely to enhance their ability to conduct thorough investigations, utilize forensic tools effectively and ensure procedural accuracy. However, a notable 12% of respondents reported that they had not received any such training, highlighting a critical gap in professional development. The absence of adequate training can lead to delays in evidence collection, improper handling of forensic materials and procedural lapses, ultimately affecting the efficiency and accuracy of murder investigations. Addressing this gap through structured training programmes, periodic skill enhancement workshops and access to updated investigative methodologies is essential for improving the overall effectiveness of law enforcement in handling murder cases.
Use of Forensic Techniques in Murder Investigations
Forensic science is an indispensable tool in modern criminal investigations, particularly murder cases, as it provides scientific validation and objective evidence to support legal proceedings. The survey revealed that an overwhelming 94% of investigating officers confirmed the regular use of forensic techniques during their investigations. This high percentage indicates a strong reliance on forensic methodologies such as DNA analysis, ballistic examinations, fingerprint identification and toxicology reports, reinforcing the role of technique in evidence collection, crime scene analysis and suspect identification to establish facts and strengthen cases. However, 6% of respondents stated that forensic techniques were not utilized in their investigations. This could be attributed to limited forensic infrastructure, lack of accessibility to forensic laboratories, insufficient training in forensic applications or procedural delays in obtaining forensic reports. The absence of forensic evidence in a murder investigation can lead to weakened prosecution cases, wrongful convictions or even the inability to identify perpetrators. Expanding forensic facilities, providing specialized training to investigating officers and streamlining forensic report submission processes are essential to bridge this gap. Ensuring timely access to forensic science resources will significantly enhance the accuracy, credibility and efficiency of murder investigations, leading to faster and more reliable justice delivery.
Timely Submission of Reports
The efficiency and success of a murder investigation depend heavily on the timely submission of crucial reports, as delays can lead to prolonged legal proceedings, loss of critical evidence and hindered case resolution. The survey highlights three key reports that make a significant impact on the investigation process: the postmortem report; the forensic science laboratory (FSL) report; and the charge sheet, detailed below.
A postmortem examination is a fundamental part of a murder investigation, providing crucial insights into the cause and manner of death. The survey findings indicate that 77% of investigating officers confirmed the timely submission of postmortem reports, ensuring that medical evidence is readily available for case progression. However, 23% of respondents reported delays in receiving postmortem reports, which could impede the investigation, delay arrests or weaken the prosecution’s case. These delays may arise due to overburdened forensic departments, bureaucratic inefficiencies or logistical challenges in report generation and distribution.
Forensic reports provide scientific evidence for establishing guilt, confirming weapon usage and validating crime scene findings. The survey revealed that 67% of investigating officers stated that FSL reports were submitted on time, ensuring a smoother investigation process. However, 33% of respondents highlighted delays in forensic report submission, pointing to potential backlogs, a shortage of forensic experts and slow processing in forensic laboratories. These delays can hamper evidence-based decision-making, leading to extended investigation periods and, in some cases, a compromised judicial outcome.
According to legal provisions, the charge sheet in murder cases must be filed within 90 days to ensure a swift trial and prevent unnecessary legal delays. Encouragingly, the survey indicates that 96% of investigating officers reported adherence to this mandatory timeframe, ensuring that cases move forward without procedural setbacks. However, 4% of respondents acknowledged delays in filing the charge sheet, which could result in weakened prosecution efforts, loss of witness credibility and challenges securing convictions.
Strengthening forensic infrastructure, increasing the trained workforce, digitizing reporting systems and establishing stricter monitoring mechanisms are essential to enhancing efficiency and eliminating delays. Timely report submission plays a pivotal role in expediting murder investigations, ensuring swift justice for victims and accountability for offenders.
Key Challenges Affecting the Speed of Murder Investigations
The timely resolution of murder cases is often hindered by several critical challenges, leading to delays in justice, increased case backlogs and difficulties in securing convictions. The survey identifies four major obstacles that significantly impact the efficiency of murder investigations: shortage of investigating officers; absconding of the accused; frequent transfers of cases; and inconsistent witness statements.
Shortage of Investigating Officers
One of the most pressing concerns affecting the speed of murder investigations is the severe shortage of investigating officers. A staggering 90% of respondents reported that having insufficient officers has a negative impact on the investigation process, resulting in overburdened personnel, slower case progress and reduced attention to individual cases. This shortage limits the ability to conduct thorough inquiries, collect evidence efficiently and follow up on crucial leads, ultimately delaying justice. On the other hand, 10% of respondents did not perceive it as a significant issue, possibly due to efficient workload distribution or better resource allocation in certain areas.
Absconding of the Accused
The fleeing of suspects remains a major hurdle in murder investigations, as it often necessitates extensive search operations, interstate coordination and prolonged legal procedures. The survey found that 94% of investigating officers agreed that the absconding of the accused causes substantial delays, making it difficult to apprehend the suspect, gather critical evidence and proceed with legal formalities. Only 6% of respondents did not view it as a major factor, possibly due to the availability of strong leads, efficient tracking mechanisms or cooperative law enforcement networks.
Frequent Transfers of Cases
Continuity in an investigation is crucial for its success, but frequent transfers of cases between multiple officers often lead to disruptions, miscommunication and a loss of investigative momentum. According to the survey, 85% of respondents believed that case transfers make a negative impact on the investigation process, as each new officer has to re-familiarize themselves with the case details, re-examine evidence and rebuild rapport with witnesses. These disruptions extend the timeline of the investigation, reduce efficiency and can result in critical gaps in the case. However, 15% of investigating officers did not find frequent transfers problematic, possibly due to effective record-keeping, collaborative teamwork or standardized investigative procedures that minimize disruptions.
Inconsistent Witness Statements
The credibility and consistency of witness statements play a pivotal role in the success of an investigation. However, the survey found that an overwhelming 98% of respondents identified frequent changes in witness testimonies as a major obstacle in completing murder investigations. Inconsistent statements weaken the prosecution’s case, create legal loopholes and can lead to wrongful acquittals. Witnesses may change their statements due to fear, coercion, political pressure or personal biases, making it difficult for investigators to establish a solid case. In contrast, only 2% of respondents did not perceive this as a significant challenge, possibly due to strong legal safeguards, witness protection measures or efficient evidence corroboration.
To overcome these obstacles, it is essential to increase the number of trained investigating officers, strengthen legal mechanisms for tracking absconding accused, implement policies to reduce case transfers and establish robust witness protection programmes. Efficient case management systems, improved inter-agency coordination and enhanced forensic support can significantly streamline murder investigations, ensuring faster case resolutions and improved conviction rates.
Structural and Legal Reforms in Investigation Procedures
The effectiveness of murder investigations depends not solely on the efficiency of investigating officers but also on the structural and legal framework governing the investigative process. To identify key areas of improvement, the study examined the necessity of reforming investigative procedures and the impact of institutional changes, legal provisions and procedural amendments on ensuring timely and effective murder case resolutions. The findings highlight three major areas requiring reform: separation of investigation and law-and-order duties; consultation with public prosecutors; and need for legislative amendments.
Separation of Investigation and Law-and-Order Duties
A well-structured and specialized investigation wing can significantly improve the efficiency and focus of murder investigations. The survey revealed that 96% of respondents supported separating the investigation unit from the law-and-order branch, arguing that this would allow officers to dedicate their time exclusively to solving cases without being diverted by routine law-and-order responsibilities. A separate investigation wing would enable officers to develop specialized expertise, conduct more thorough inquiries and expedite case resolutions. However, 4% of respondents opposed this reform, possibly due to concerns about resource allocation, logistical challenges or the risk of departmental fragmentation.
Consultation with Public Prosecutors
Legal coordination between investigating officers and public prosecutors is crucial for building strong cases and ensuring successful prosecutions. The study found that 65% of investigating officers reported consulting public prosecutors during murder investigations, which helps to frame charges correctly, understand legal intricacies and strengthen evidence presentation. However, a concerning 35% admitted that they do not consult public prosecutors, suggesting a gap in legal coordination that may lead to weak case preparation, procedural errors and increased chances of acquittals. This lack of collaboration highlights the need for mandatory legal consultations and improved training programmes to enhance investigators’ understanding of legal procedures.
Need for Legislative Amendments
The study also explored the necessity of legislative reforms to establish clearer guidelines and timeframes for murder investigations. Two key amendments were suggested:
(a) Mandating speedy investigations in heinous crimes: 87% of respondents supported inserting a specific provision in the Police Act that would mandate time-bound investigations for heinous crimes like murder. This amendment would help prioritize serious cases, reduce delays and enhance accountability in the investigative process. However, 13% of respondents opposed such a change, possibly due to concerns about rigid timelines affecting the thoroughness of investigations or logistical constraints in complex cases.
(b) Setting a fixed time limit for murder investigations: A majority, 83% of respondents, advocated incorporating a fixed time limit in the procedural code to ensure that murder investigations are completed within a specific timeframe. This measure could enhance efficiency, reduce case backlogs and prevent undue delays. However, 17% of respondents opposed this idea, arguing that strict time limits may hinder the ability to conduct comprehensive investigations, especially in cases involving forensic delays, witness protection issues or absconding suspects.
The findings indicate a strong demand for structural and legal reforms to enhance investigative efficiency. Establishing a dedicated investigation wing, enforcing mandatory legal consultations and introducing legislative amendments can significantly improve the quality and speed of murder investigations. However, these reforms must be implemented with careful planning, adequate resource allocation and flexibility to accommodate case-specific complexities.
Interpretation of Responses Based on Statistical Analysis
To assess the factors influencing the efficiency of murder investigations in Assam, χ 2 tests were conducted on two key aspects: (i) the relationship between forensic training and timely report submission; and (ii) the association between consultation with public prosecutors and timely charge sheet filing.
The first analysis examined whether receiving forensic training significantly makes an impact on the timely submission of investigative reports, such as postmortem and forensic science reports. The χ 2 test results (χ 2 = 1.70, p = 0.1916) indicate no statistically significant association between forensic training and the prompt submission of reports. This suggests that even though most investigating officers receive forensic training, external factors such as procedural delays, resource limitations or bureaucratic inefficiencies may still hinder the timely submission of critical reports.
In contrast, the second analysis explored the link between consulting public prosecutors and the timely filing of charge sheets within the mandated 90-day period. The χ 2 test results (χ 2 = 9.82, p = 0.0017) reveal a statistically significant association between these two factors. This implies that officers who consult public prosecutors during the investigation are more likely to file charge sheets within the required timeframe. The finding highlights the importance of legal guidance in streamlining investigations and ensuring adherence to procedural deadlines.
Overall, while forensic training alone does not guarantee efficiency in report submission, collaboration with legal professionals plays a crucial role in expediting the judicial process. These insights emphasize the need for a holistic approach to investigation reforms, integrating forensic advancements and legal coordination to achieve faster case resolution.
To assess whether receiving forensic training has a significant impact on the timely submission of forensic reports, a χ 2 test of independence was conducted using a contingency table. The dataset consisted of responses from 104 investigating officers, of whom 91 had received forensic training, and 13 had not. Regarding forensic report submission, 70 officers confirmed that reports were submitted on time, whereas 30 officers reported delays.
The χ 2 test yielded a χ 2 statistic of 4.24 with a p-value of 0.0395, indicating statistical significance at the 5% level. This suggests that the relationship between forensic training and timely forensic report submission is not purely due to chance. Furthermore, Cramér’s V value of 0.206 suggests a weak to moderate association between the two variables.
These findings indicate that while forensic training is statistically linked to the timely submission of forensic reports, the strength of this association is relatively weak. This suggests that while training contributes to efficiency, other factors such as procedural delays, resource availability and administrative bottlenecks might influence forensic report submission timelines.
The χ 2 test of independence was performed to analyse the association between investigating officer training and the timely filing of charge sheets. The test resulted in a χ 2 statistic of 5.19 with a p-value of 0.0227, indicating a statistically significant association at a 5% significance level.
Cramér’s V was calculated to measure this association’s strength, yielding a value of 0.158. This suggests a weak to moderate association between training and the timely filing of charge sheets. While the relationship is statistically significant, the effect size is not very strong, indicating that other factors may also influence timely charge sheet filing.
Conclusion
The survey findings emphasize the urgent need for reforms in forensic procedures, investigation timelines, structural organization and legal provisions to improve the efficiency of murder investigations in Assam. Addressing challenges such as forensic delays, officer shortages, case transfers and witness inconsistencies will ensure that justice is delivered swiftly and effectively. Investigating officers are pivotal in ensuring justice delivery, particularly in murder cases in Assam. The study highlights state-specific challenges, including resource constraints, delayed forensic reports and witness vulnerabilities, which often hinder the timely disposal of cases. Addressing these issues requires targeted interventions to enhance investigative efficiency. To facilitate speedy investigations, specialized training programmes should be introduced for investigating officers, equipping them with modern forensic techniques and artificial intelligence-driven crime analysis tools. Integrating fast-track courts can further accelerate case resolution, ensuring that justice is not delayed.
Additionally, stronger witness protection programmes are essential to prevent intimidation and encourage investigation cooperation. A balanced approach is necessary to maintain both investigation quality and case speed. While expediting legal processes is crucial, it should not compromise the thoroughness and fairness of investigations. Strengthening coordination between law enforcement, forensic experts and the judiciary can significantly enhance the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in Assam.
Acknowledgements
The researchers at the outset owe profound gratitude to all the teaching and non-teaching staff of Amity Law School, Amity University Rajasthan without whose support and cooperation the manuscript would never have found its final form. The researchers would further like to express gratitude to the Co-Supervisor, Dr Anirban Chakraborty, for the support and assistance rendered from his side. The researchers are especially thankful to Dr Minal Bafna, an accomplished Physicist, Educator, Administrator and Researcher for her expert guidance, valuable insights and constructive feedback throughout the research process. The researchers wholeheartedly convey innermost gratitude to our parents for rendering their priceless and momentous assistance. The researchers put forward profound gratitude to The Almighty God for showering His endowments upon the researcher in the form of blessings during the tenure of the research work. At last, the researchers reiterate the willingness to communicate prolific gratitude to every individual who in one way or the other enabled the accomplishment of the research work.
Competing interests
No potential competing interests were reported by the authors.
Moushumi Sarmah is a Research Scholar at Amity Law School, Amity University Rajasthan, India. She also holds a diploma in Cyber Law and Computer Application and has also successfully completed certificate courses on International Investment Law and International Contracts. Her areas of interest include criminal law, criminology, contract law, company law, taxation, etc. She has publications in international as well as national journals and has also presented various research papers covering different areas of law in international and national seminars, conferences and workshops. She has also completed a Faculty Development Programme, Short-Term Course and Orientation and Sensitization Programme to her credit.
Puneet Bafna is a Professor of Law at Amity Law School, Amity University Rajasthan, India. He holds a post-graduate diploma in Corporate Law and a post-graduate diploma in Business Management. His areas of interest includes criminal law, criminology, design ethics and intellectual property rights, environmental law, and corporate and business law. He has been a resource person for webinars/guest lectures, supervised PhD scholars, attended and participated in conferences/workshops/seminars/guest lectures, chaired technical sessions and co-chaired Moot Court sessions. He has practised in various courts of Rajasthan, and been appointed as a panel lawyer in various departments in Rajasthan, for instance the Airport Authority of India, E.S.I., RIICO, L.I.C. and U.C.O. Bank, and worked as a legal retainer in finance companies.
