Inspection Memo

Introduction

An “Inspection Memo” (also referred to in practice as an arrest/inspection memorandum or inspection note) is the contemporaneous record of the physical condition of a person when brought into custody. Though not defined by a single statutory provision, the inspection memo functions as a primary safeguard against custodial violence, an evidentiary document for both prosecution and defence, and a routine administrative record that links arrest, medical examination and subsequent investigation. For Indian practitioners, mastery of the inspection memo—how it should be prepared, what it must contain, and how courts treat it—is essential to protecting liberty rights and preserving forensic truth.

Core Legal Framework

• Constitution of India
• Article 22(1) — the arrested person must be informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds of arrest.
• Article 22(2) — an arrested person must be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours (excluding the time necessary for travel).
• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC)
• Section 50 — obligation of a police officer making an arrest without warrant to communicate the grounds of arrest to the arrested person.
• Section 46 — limits on the use of force while making an arrest; arrests must be effected by minimal necessary force.
• Sections which operate alongside the inspection memo regime: Sections governing FIRs (Section 154), police statements (Section 161), recording of confessions and statements by magistrates (Section 164), and production before a magistrate (Article 22 read with relevant CrPC practice for custody/production).
• Judicial directions (binding/practical framework)
• The Supreme Court in DK Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) laid down detailed safeguards regarding arrests and the documentation to be maintained — including the requirement of an arrest/inspection memo, attestation, availability of medical examination, and production formalities. DK Basu has become the operative code of best practice for arrest documentation.
• Medico-legal framework
• Medico-legal reports (MLRs) and medical certificates produced on examination of the arrested person are separate but complementary documentary evidence; they must be contemporaneous and properly signed by the examining medical officer.

Note: The law does not house a single statutory definition of “inspection memo”; rather the obligation to create such contemporaneous records flows from the constitutional right against arbitrary detention, statutory safeguards around arrest and production, and judicially prescribed procedures (notably DK Basu).

Practical Application and Nuances

What an inspection memo is and who prepares it
– Two distinct but related documents are often produced on arrest:
1. Police arrest memo / memo of arrest and seizure: prepared by the arresting officer at the scene or at the police station; records basic facts of arrest and items seized.
2. Magistrate’s inspection memo / personal inspection note: recorded by a Magistrate at the time the arrestee is produced before him/her; records the magistrate’s own observations of the person’s physical condition.
– Separate but closely-linked document: Medico‑legal Report (MLR) — clinical findings by a doctor who medically examines the arrestee.

Essential contents of an effective inspection memo
– Identity particulars: name, age, address, any known identification marks.
– Timing and place: date and exact time of arrest; time of entry into custody; place where memo made.
– Arresting team: names and ranks of arresting officers, police station, case number (if any).
– Detailed injury account: precise anatomical location, dimensions (length/ breadth), nature (abrasion, contusion, laceration, incision, swelling), type (old/fresh), probable cause, and whether bleeding is present.
– Clothing: state of clothing — torn, stained, bloodstains, damp, removed, etc.
– Functional observations: ability to walk, use limbs, speech, consciousness level.
– Medical action: whether a medical examination was done or ordered, name of examining doctor, hospital/ward, time of exam, and sample collections (photographs, swabs).
– Witnesses and signatures: names and signatures of at least one independent witness (as DK Basu prescribes), signatures of the arrestee (if able), arresting officer, and the officer-in-charge; magistrate’s counter-signature if applicable.
– Photographs and diagrams: annotations of wound location, contemporaneous photographs with date/time stamp where possible.
– Chain of custody references to seized articles or samples.

How the inspection memo is used in everyday practice
– Defence use:
– To challenge state denial of custodial assault: inconsistency between memo/MLR and subsequent police reports can establish an attempt to cover up injury.
– To found a habeas corpus or custodial violence complaint promptly; to secure immediate medical treatment and independent medico-legal examination.
– To cross‑examine prosecution witnesses and impeach police assertions about the manner of arrest.
– Prosecution use:
– To prove injuries sustained during commission of an alleged offence (if consistent with offense); to corroborate occurrence and timing of violent acts.
– To shield against allegations of custodial beating by ensuring the memo and MLR are contemporaneous and properly attested.
– Judicial use:
– Magistrates and trial courts treat contemporaneous inspection entries and MLRs as weighty material; courts expect production of original memos and medical records.
– Magistrates must satisfy themselves about the arrestee’s physical condition at the time of production (as endorsed in Joginder Kumar and DK Basu jurisprudence).

Concrete examples
– Example A — Defence tactic: An accused is booked and later alleges assault in custody. If the police’s arrest memo recorded “no visible injury” but the magistrate’s inspection memo/MLR the following day records multiple fresh contusions inconsistent with the police version, the defence will use the contradiction to press for custodial-abuse inquiry, seek quashing of subsequent confessions (if any), and push for independent medical examination and FIR under Section 154.
– Example B — Prosecution precaution: When arresting for a violent offence, the arresting officer ensures a thorough inspection memo with photograph and immediate MLR that documents injuries consistent with the alleged incident — this prevents later defence arguments of after-acquired injuries or manufacturing.

Evidentiary value and corroboration
– A contemporaneous, attested inspection memo backed by an immediate MLR and photographs is high-probability evidence; courts give it substantial weight if it is made before any opportunity to manipulate facts.
– Conversely, a memo prepared late, unsigned by independent witnesses, lacking photographs or an MLR, is vulnerable to being described as ex post facto embellishment.

Landmark Judgments

• DK Basu v. State of West Bengal, (1997) 1 SCC 416
• Key principles: mandatory safeguards on arrest and detention; arrest memo to be prepared in duplicate, attested by at least one witness; memorandum to contain time, place, reasons for arrest; medical examination within 24 hours; disclosure of rights; provision of copy of arrest memo to arrested person. The judgment elevated procedural checks such as inspection memos into constitutional safeguards.
• Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P., (1994) 4 SCC 260
• Key principle: Magistrates and police must act as a check against arbitrary arrests. The Court emphasised the duty of police to record reasons for arrest and the magistrate’s duty to examine legality of detention and to safeguard the arrestee’s rights — duties that render contemporaneous documentation (inspection memo/medical record) crucial.
• How courts have treated inspection memos:
• Contemporaneous inspection entries and MLRs have been repeatedly recognised as reliable indicia of what actually occurred at the point of custody. Courts have penalised police where no proper memo existed or where it was inconsistent with medical records.

Strategic Considerations for Practitioners

For defence counsel
– Act immediately: seek production of the arrested person before a magistrate at once; ask the magistrate to personally inspect and record the condition; demand a medical examination by an independent government doctor and immediate photographs.
– Preserve originals: demand immediate copies of the arrest/inspection memo, MLR, diary entries and seizure memo. Apply for inspection of the police station records and forwarding letters.
– Create contemporaneous counter-records: if family or counsel are present, get their signatures on the arrest memo; if possible, arrange for NGO or independent witness attendance; take dated photographs at earliest opportunity.
– Use contradictions: compare the arrest memo, magistrate’s note, MLR and later clinical notes; highlight inconsistencies to obtain relief — custody visit by independent authority, FIR for custodial assault, quashing of tainted confessions, or compensation.
– File prompt remedies: token delay can be fatal — file writ/habeas or criminal complaint without delay where evidence shows custodial injuries.

For prosecution counsel / police lawyering
– Ensure contemporaneousness: instruct arresting officers to prepare the memo at the scene or immediately on arrival; get independent witnesses and photographs; order immediate MLR and retain originals.
– Complete the chain: enter all facts in the station diary, forward copies to magistrate and keep duplicate memos to avoid later disputes about authenticity.
– Avoid after-the-fact alterations: any correction should be by struck-through entries with signatures; unexplained, late signatures or backdated memos attract judicial suspicion.
– Train rank-and-file: standardised templates, training to describe injuries precisely (distance, size, colour), and strict preservation of original documents and photographs will prevent later impeachments.

Common pitfalls to avoid
– Delay in medical examination or photographs — reduces credibility of memo/MLR.
– Absence of independent witness attestation — weakens the memo’s weight.
– Incomplete description — vague words like “injured” or “hurt” without particulars are vulnerable.
– Reliance on oral assertions rather than preserving originals and contemporaneous documentary proof.
– Magistrate or police failing to note injuries at time of production — this invites immediate judicial remedy and suspicion.

Practical drafting checklist for an inspection memo
– Heading: “Inspection Memo” with date/time/place clearly stated.
– Identity of arrestee with any identity marks.
– Arrest particulars: officers, police station, FIR/case number (if any).
– Full, precise injury descriptions with diagrams/measurements and the instrumentality if known.
– Photography reference: file name, photographer, time stamp.
– Medical action: name of hospital/doctor and whether samples taken; MLR reference number.
– Witness attestation: name, address, relationship and signatures; copy given to arrestee endorsed on the memo.
– Signature blocks: arrestee (or note of inability to sign), arresting officer, officer-in-charge, independent witness, magistrate (if inspected).

Conclusion

The inspection memo is not a mere clerical formality; it is a frontline safeguard against custodial abuse and an important piece of forensic evidence. Practitioners must treat it as a contemporaneous, technical document requiring precision, independent attestation, and immediate preservation. For defence lawyers, an effective inspection memo (and prompt MLR and photographs) can be decisive in exposing custodial violence and securing remedies. For prosecutors and police, meticulous, contemporaneous memos prevent later challenge and strengthen the evidentiary chain. The DK Basu and Joginder Kumar line of authorities make clear that courts will look critically at whether the statutory and constitutional protections surrounding arrest were honored — and the inspection memo is frequently the focal point of that scrutiny.