BOOK I
EXERCISE OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION

TITLE II
INQUIRIES AND IDENTITY CHECKS

CHAPTER I
FLAGRANT FELONIES AND MISDEMEANOURS

Article 56
Where the type of the felony is such that evidence of it may be collected by seizing papers, documents, electronic data or other articles in the possession of the persons who appear to be involved in the felony or to be in possession of documents, information or articles pertaining to the criminal offence, the judicial police officer proceeds forthwith to the domicile of such persons to initiate a search, in respect of which he draws up an official report.
He is the only person, together with those persons mentioned under article 57 and any persons upon whom he calls pursuant to article 60, to be allowed to examine the papers or documents electronic data before proceeding to seize them.
However, he has the duty first to initiate any step appropriate to ensure the observance of professional secrecy and of the defendant's rights.
Any article or document seized is immediately entered on an inventory and placed under official seals. However, if it is difficult to make such an inventory on the spot, they are put under temporary closed official seals until such time as an inventory can be taken and they can be placed under final official seals. This is done in the presence of the persons who have witnessed the search pursuant to the conditions set out by article 57.
The seizure of any electronic data necessary for the discovery of the truth is carried out by placing in the hands of justice, either the physical medium holding this data or a copy of the data made in the presence of those persons present at the seizure.
If a copy is made, then on the orders of the district prosecutor, any electronic data the possession or use of which is illegal or dangerous to the safety of persons or property may be permanently erased from any physical medium that has not been placed in judicial safekeeping.
With the agreement of the district prosecutor, the judicial police officer only allows the seizure of articles, documents or electronic data useful for the discovery of the truth.
Where the seizure involves money, ingots, property or securities, the preservation of which in their original form is not necessary for the discovery of the truth, the district prosecutor may authorise their deposit in the Deposit and Consignment Office or at the Bank of France.
Where the seizure involves forged euro bank notes or coins, the judicial police officer must send at least one example of each type of note or coin suspected of being false to the national laboratory authorised for this task, for analysis and identification,. The national laboratory may open the official seals. It draws up an inventory in a report which must mention any opening or re-opening of the seals. When these operations are completed, the report and the sealed objects are put into the hands of the clerk of the appropriate court. This transfer is recorded in an official report.
The provisions of the previous paragraph do not apply where only one example of a particular type of suspect banknote or coin exists and it is needed for the discovery of the truth.
If they are seem able to provide information about articles, documents or electronic data seized, the persons present when the seizure is made may be kept at the scene of the seizure by the judicial police officer for as long as is necessary to complete these operations.

ARTICLE 56-1
A search of the chambers of an advocate or of his domicile may only be made by a judge or prosecutor and in the presence of the president of the Bar Association or of his delegate, after a written and reasoned decision from this judge or prosecutor, which indicates the nature of the offence or offences in respect of which the search is made, the reasons justifying the search and its object. The substance of the decision is made known to the president of the bar association or his delegate by the judge or prosecutor from the start. The judge or prosecutor and the president or his delegate are the only ones who have the right to be informed about documents discovered during a search with a view to their possible seizure. There documents may be seized relating to offences other than those mentioned in the decision referred to above. The dispositions of the present paragraph are enforced under penalty of nullity.
The judge or prosecutor who carries out the search is responsible for ensuring that it does not prejudice the freedom of exercise of the profession of advocate.
The president or his delegate may object to the seizure of a document which the judge or prosecutor intends to carry out if he considers that it would be irregular. The document is then placed under official seals. This is recorded in an official record indicating the objections of the chairman or his delegate, which is not entered as part of the procedural file. Where other documents have been seized during the search without objection, the official record is separate from that required by article 57. This official record and the document placed under seal are transmitted to the liberty and custody judge with the original or a copy of the file.
Within five days from receiving the documents, the liberty and custody judge gives a reasoned ruling on the objection, which is not open to appeal.
To this end, he hears the judge or prosecutor who carried out the search and, where necessary, the district prosecutor and also the advocate in the chambers subject to the search and the president or his delegate. He may open the seal in the presence of these persons.
Where he considers that it is not necessary to seize the document, the liberty and custody judge orders its immediate return and the destruction of the official record recording the events and, where necessary, the cancellation of any reference to that document or its contents which appears in the official file of the case.
Otherwise, he orders the document and the official record to form part of the official file. His decision does not preclude the parties asking the seizure to be nullified by, as appropriate, the trial court or the investigating chamber.
The provisions of the present article are also applicable to searches carried out in the offices of the Bar Association or the offices for the payment of advocates. In these cases, the responsibilities given to the liberty and custody judge are exercised by the president of the district court who must previously be informed of the search. The same applies to any search at the offices or domicile of the president of the Bar Association.

Article 56-2
A search of the premises of a press or audio-visual communications business may only be made by a judge or prosecutor who ensures that such investigations do not violate the freedom of exercise of the profession of journalist and do not unjustifiably obstruct or delay the distribution of information.

Article 56-3
A search of the office of a doctor, notary, attorney or bailiff is made by a judge or prosecutor and in the presence of the person responsible for the professional college or organisation to which the person concerned belongs, or in the presence of his representative.

Article 57
Subject to the terms of the previous article concerning the observance of professional secrecy and of the defendant's rights, the operations prescribed by that article are made in the presence of the person in whose domicile the search is made.
Where this is impossible, the judicial police officer has the duty to ask him to appoint a representative of his choice; failing this, the judicial police officer will appoint two witnesses, chosen for this purpose from among persons who are not under his administrative authority.
The official report of these operations is drafted as described under article 66 and is signed by the persons mentioned by the present article; in the event of a refusal, this is noted in the official report.

Article 57-1
Judicial police officers or judicial police agents under their supervision may, during the course of a seizure carried out in the conditions laid down by the present Code, access any data relevant to the inquiry in progress stored in a computer system set up within the premises where the seizure is carried out or in another computer system, provided the data is accessible from the initial system or is available for the initial system.
Where it is known in advance that data which is accessible from the initial system or available for the initial system is stored in another computer system situated outside the territory of the French Republic, it is collected by a judicial police officer, pursuant to the conditions of access provided by any international agreements currently in force.
The data which has been accessed pursuant to the conditions of the present article may be copied onto any medium. Any computer storage equipment may be seized and placed in judicial safekeeping under the conditions laid down by the present Code.

Article 58
Subject to the necessities of inquiries, any communication or disclosure of a document seized during a search to a person not lawfully accredited to examine it, made without the authorisation of the person under judicial investigation or his successors, or that of the signatory or addressee of the document, is punished by a fine of €4,500 and imprisonment for up to two years.

Article 59
Except where they are requested from within a building or in the exceptional cases provided for by law, searches and house visits may not be undertaken before 6 a.m. or after 9 p.m.
The formalities mentioned under articles 56, 56-1, 57 and the present article are prescribed under penalty of nullity.

Article 60
Where there is occasion to carry out any technical or scientific examination, a judicial police officer has recourse to all qualified persons.
Unless they are registered on a list provided for by article 157, the persons called upon take an oath in writing to assist the administration of justice upon their honour and conscience.
The persons appointed to carry out any technical or scientific examination may open the official seals. They draw up an inventory and mention this in a report made in conformity with articles 163 and 166. They may orally communicate their findings to the investigators in cases of emergency.
On the instructions of the district prosecutor, a judicial police officer discloses the findings of the technical and scientific examinations to those persons against whom matters exist giving rise to the suspicion that they have committed or have attempted to commit offences, and also to the victims.

BOOK I
EXERCISE OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION

TITLE II
INQUIRIES AND IDENTITY CHECKS

CHAPTER I
FLAGRANT FELONIES AND MISDEMEANOURS

Article 70
If the needs of an inquiry into a flagrant felony or misdemeanour, punished by at least three years' imprisonment, justify this, the district prosecutor may, without prejudice to the application of the provisions of article 73, issue a warrant to search for any person against whom there exists any plausible reason or reasons to suspect that he has committed or attempted to commit the offence.
The provisions of article 134 apply to the execution of this warrant. The person found as a result of this warrant is placed in custody by the judicial police officer at the place where he was found, who may question him, without prejudice to the application of article 43 and the ability of the investigators already seised of the facts to come to the scene in order to conduct this hearing themselves, after being granted, if necessary, an extension of jurisdiction in accordance with article 18. The district prosecutor who issued the search warrant is informed of this at the beginning of the operation. This judge may order that the person be transported to the premises of the inquiry team seised of the case for the duration of the custody period.
If a person who is the subject of a search warrant is not found during the course of the inquiry, and if the district prosecutor orders the opening of an investigation into an unnamed person, the search warrant remains valid for the duration of the investigation, unless it is revoked by the investigating judge.

BOOK I
EXERCISE OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION

TITLE II
INQUIRIES AND IDENTITY CHECKS

CHAPTER II
THE PRELIMINARY POLICE INQUIRY

ARTICLE 76
Searches, house visits and seizures of exhibits may not be made without the express consent of the person in whose residence the operation takes place.
Such consent must be made in the form of a hand-written statement by the person concerned or, if the person cannot write, this is noted in the official report, together with his consent.
The provisions set out in articles 56 and 59 (first paragraph) are applicable.
If the needs of an inquiry into a felony or a misdemeanour punished by a prison sentence of five years or more justify this, the liberty and custody judge of the first instance court may, at the request of the district prosecutor, decide, in a written and reasoned decision, that the operations provided for by the present article will be carried out without the consent of the person in whose residence they take place. On pain of nullity, the custody judge's ruling states the qualification of the offence for which the evidence is being sought, as well as the address of the places in which these operations may be carried out. This decision is reasoned with reference to the legal and factual matters which justify the necessity for these measures. The operations are carried out under the direction of the judge who ordered them, who may travel to the places in question to ensure that the legal provisions are observed. On pain of nullity, these measures may serve no purpose other than the seeking out and recording of the offences outlined in the custody judge's ruling. However, if these operations reveal offences other than those outlined in this ruling, this does not constitute grounds for nullity in relation to proceedings in respect of them.
For the application of these dispositions, the liberty and custody judge of the district court whose prosecutor leads the investigation is competent, whatever the territorial jurisdiction in which the search will take place. The liberty and custody judge may then travel to the location wherever on the national territory it may be. The district prosecutor may also refer the matter to the liberty and custody judge of the district court in the territorial jurisdiction where the search will take place, through the intermediary of the district prosecutor of that court.

BOOK I
EXERCISE OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION

TITLE III
INVESTIGATING JURISDICTIONS

CHAPTER I
THE INVESTIGATING JUDGE: THE FIRST-TIER INVESTIGATING JURISDICTION

SECTION III
INSPECTIONS OF PREMISES, SEARCHES, SEIZURES AND INTERCEPTION OF CORRESPONDENCE BY TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Subsection 1
Inspections of premises, searches and seizures

Article 92
The investigating judge may go to the scene of the offence to make any useful findings or conduct a search. He informs the district prosecutor who is entitled to accompany him.
The investigating judge is always accompanied by a clerk. He drafts an official record of all his operations.

Article 93
If the requirements of the investigation call for it, the investigating judge may, after informing the court's prosecutor, journey with his clerk to any place within the national territory to proceed with any investigatory step, provided that he notifies in advance the district prosecutor attached to the court of the jurisdiction to which he travel. He enters into his official record the grounds of his journey.

Article 94
Searches are made in all the places where items or electronic data may be found which could be useful for the discovery of the truth.

Article 95
If the search is made in the domicile of the person under judicial examination, the investigating judge must comply with the provisions of articles 57 and 59.

Article 96
If the search is made in a domicile other than that of the person under judicial examination, the person in whose domicile it must be made is invited to attend. If this person is absent or refuses to attend, the search is made in the presence of two of his relatives or relatives by marriage present on the premises or, failing which, in the presence of two witnesses.
The investigating judge must comply with the provisions of articles 57 (second paragraph) and 59.
However, he has the duty to organise in advance all the appropriate measures to ensure the observance of professional secrecy and the defendant's rights.
The provisions of articles 56, 56-1, 56-2 and 56-3 apply to searches carried out by the investigating judge.

Article 97
Where in the course of an investigation there is a need to search for documents or electronic data, and subject to the requirements of the investigation and compliance, where necessary, with the obligation imposed by the third paragraph of the previous article, the investigating judge or the judicial police officer commissioned by him has the sole right to examine such documents before carrying out the seizure.
An inventory is made of all items, documents and electronic data placed in judicial safekeeping, which are immediately placed under official seals. However, if this is difficult to do on the spot, the judicial police officer proceeds as indicated under the fourth paragraph of article 56.
The seizure of any electronic data necessary for the discovery of the truth is carried out either by seizure of the physical medium in which the data is held or by means of a copy of the data made in the presence of those persons who were present at the seizure.
If a copy is made, then on the orders of the district prosecutor, any electronic data the possession or use of which is illegal or dangerous to the safety of persons or property may be permanently erased from any physical medium that has not been placed in judicial safekeeping.
With the agreement of the investigating judge, the judicial police officer only allows the seizure of articles, documents or electronic data useful for the discovery of the truth.
If these official seals are closed, they may be opened and the documents examined only in the presence of the person under judicial examination in the presence of his advocate, or where the latter has been duly summoned. The third party in whose residence the seizure was made is also invited to attend during this operation.
Unless the requirements of the investigation prevent it, a copy or photocopy of the documents or electronic data placed under judicial safekeeping may be delivered as soon as possible to any persons concerned who request it at their own expense.
If the seizure comprises monies, ingots, papers or securities which do not necessarily have to be preserved in kind for the discovery of the truth or for the safeguarding of the rights of the parties, he may authorise the clerk to deposit them with the Deposit and Consignment Office or with the Bank of France.
If the seizure comprises counterfeit banknotes or coins, the investigating judge or the judicial police officer working with him must provide the national analysis centre with at least one example of each type of coin or banknote suspected of being fake. The national analysis centre may proceed to open any seals. It makes a list in a report which must record any opening or reopening of the seals. When the process of testing is complete, the report and the seals must be put into the hands of a clerk in the relevant court of law. An official record is made of their being so deposited.
The requirements of the preceding paragraph do not apply in cases where there is only one suspected fake coin or note, and this is needed to establish the truth.

Article 97-1
Where this is necessary to comply with a rogatory letter, the judicial police officer may carry out the measures provided for by article 57-1.

Article 98
Subject to the requirements of the judicial investigation, any communication or disclosure made without the authorisation of the person under judicial examination or that of his beneficiaries or of the signatory or addressee of a document found during a search, to a person not authorised by law to examine it, is punished by a €4,500 fine and two years' imprisonment.

Article 99
During the investigation, the investigating judge is competent to decide on the restitution of articles placed under judicial authority.
He decides by a making a reasoned order either upon the district prosecutor's submissions or on his own motion, after hearing the prosecutor's opinion, or upon the application of the person under judicial examination, the civil party or any other person claiming a right over the article.
He may also on its own motion decide, with the agreement of the district prosecutor, to return or to have returned the articles placed under judicial authority whose ownership is not disputed to the victim of the offence.
No restitution is made where it is liable to hinder the discovery of the truth or the safeguard of the rights of the parties, or where it creates a danger for persons or for property. It may be refused when the confiscation of the article is provided for by law.
The investigating judge's order under the second paragraph of the present article is served either on the applicant in the event of a dismissal of the application, or on the public prosecutor and on any other party concerned in the event of a restitution decision. It may be referred to the investigating chamber by an ordinary application filed with the court office within the time limit and according to the conditions set out by the fourth paragraph of article 186. This time limit is suspensive.
The third party's observations may be heard by the investigating chamber, as well as those of the parties, but he may not ask for the case file to be put at his disposal.

Article 99-1
Where, in the course of judicial proceedings or of checks referred to in article 283-5 of the Rural Code, the decision has been made to seize or confiscate one or more live animals, for whatever reason, the district prosecutor attached to the district court with jurisdiction over where the offence took place or, if he is seised of the case, the investigating judge, may place the animal in a specially designated holding place until the offence has been tried.
If the conditions the animal is kept in are liable to render it a danger to others or to damage its health, the investigating judge, if seised of the case, or the president of the district court or another judge delegated by him may, in a reasoned decision taken on the submissions of the district prosecutor and after hearing the opinion of a veterinary surgeon, order it to be sold, entrusted to a third party, or destroyed.
The owner, if his identity is known, is informed of this order. He may refer it to the president of the court of appeal of the jurisdiction or to a judge of this court appointed by him, or, if the order came from the investigating judge, to the investigating chamber under the conditions provided for in the fifth and sixth paragraphs of article 99.
Any proceeds generated by the sale of the animal are deposited for a period of five years. Where the judicial proceedings which justified the seizure end in a discharge or the proceedings being dropped, the proceeds of the sale are given to the person who owned the animal at the moment of the seizure, if he so requests. In cases where the animal was entrusted to a third party, the owner can submit a demand for the restitution of the animal to the judge appointed in the second paragraph.
The animal's owner will be liable for any costs relating to the impounding of his animal, unless the judge designated in the second paragraph, who is seised of a request for exemption, or the court ruling on the merits of the case otherwise decides. This exemption may also be granted where proceedings are dropped or end in a discharge.

Article 99-2
Where, during the course of the investigation, it proves impossible to carry out the restitution of movable property placed under judicial safekeeping, which no longer needs to be kept in order to establish the truth, either because the owner cannot be identified, or because the owner does not claim the item within two months from the time that the official notice was sent to his domicile, the investigating judge may, subject to the rights of third parties, order the destruction of the assets or their transfer to the State property agency with a view to their disposal.
Subject to the rights of third parties, the investigating judge may also order that ownership of personal property placed under judicial safekeeping which belongs to the persons being prosecuted, where the items no longer need to be kept in order to establish the truth, and their confiscation has been provided for by the law, be surrendered to the State property service with a view to their disposal, where to continue the seizure would decrease the value of the property. If the sale of the asset is then carried out, the proceeds of this are deposited for a period of ten years. Where the proceedings are dropped, or end in a discharge or acquittal, or where the court does not order confiscation, these proceeds are given back to the owner of the items, if he so requests.
The investigating judge may also order the destruction of moveable property placed under judicial safekeeping, which no longer needs to be kept in order to establish the truth, where the items concerned are qualified by law as dangerous or harmful, or where holding them is unlawful.
The decisions taken pursuant to the present article are the subject of a reasoned decision. This order is made either on the district prosecutor's request, or by the court on its own motion after hearing his views. It is communicated to the public prosecutor, the parties concerned and, if their identity is known, the owner as well as the third parties who have rights over this property, who can transfer the matter to the investigating chamber under the conditions provided for in the fifth and sixth paragraphs of article 99.
A decree of the Conseil d'Etat determines the mode of enforcement of the present article.

Article 99-3
An investigating judge or judicial police officer delegated by him may order any person, establishment or organisation, whether public or private, or any public services liable to possess any documents relevant to the investigation, including those produced from a registered computer or data processing system, to provide them with these documents. Without legitimate grounds, the duty of professional secrecy may not be given as a reason for non-compliance with such an order. Where these orders relate to the persons mentioned in articles 56-1 to 56-3, the transfer of these documents may only take place with their consent.
Where the person does not respond to this order, the provisions of the second paragraph of article 60-1 are applicable.

Article 99-4
Where necessary to carry out a rogatory commission, a judicial police officer may issue the demands provided for by the first paragraph of article 60-2.
With the express permission of the investigating judge, a judicial police officer may issue the demands provided for by the second paragraph of article 60-2.
The organisations or persons concerned must put the requisite information at their disposal by telecommunication or by use of computers as quickly as possible.
Refusal to respond to these demands without legitimate grounds is punished in accordance with the provisions of the fourth paragraph of article 60-2.

Subsection 2
Interception of correspondence by telecommunications Articles 100 to 100-7

Article 100
For the investigation of felonies and misdemeanours, if the penalty incurred is equal to or in excess of two years' imprisonment, the investigating judge may order the interception, recording and transcription of telecommunication correspondence where the requirements of the investigation call for it. Such operations are made under his authority and supervision.
The interception decision is made in writing. It is not a jurisdictional decision and is unappealable.

Article 100-1
The order made pursuant to article 100 must include all the details identifying the link to be intercepted, the offence which justifies resorting to an interception as well as the duration of this interception.

Article 100-2
This decision is taken for a maximum duration of four months. It may be extended only by following the same conditions as to form and duration.

Article 100-3
The investigating judge or the judicial police officer appointed by him may require any qualified agent of a service or institution placed under the authority or supervision of the Minister in charge of telecommunications, or any qualified agent of a network operator or authorised purveyor of telecommunication services to set up an interception device.

Article 100-4
The investigating judge or the judicial police officer appointed by him drafts an official record of both the interception and recording operations. This official record mentions the date and time when the operation started and ended.
The recordings are placed under closed official seals.

ARTICLE 100-5
(Law 2005-1549 of 12 December 2005 Article 38 Official Journal of 13 December 2005)
The investigating judge or the judicial police officer appointed by him transcribes any correspondence which is useful for the discovery of the truth. An official record is made of these transcriptions. The transcription is attached to the case file.
Correspondence in a foreign language is transcribed into French with the assistance of an interpreter appointed for this purpose.
On penalty of nullity, no transcription may be made of any correspondence with an advocate relating to the exercise of the defendant's rights.

Article 100-6
The recordings are destroyed on the request of the district prosecutor or of the public prosecutor upon the expiry of the limitation period for prosecution.
An official record is made of the destruction.

Article 100-7
No interception may be made on the telephone line of a member of parliament or senator unless the president of the assembly he belongs to is informed of the interception by the investigating judge.
No interception may be made on a telephone line connecting the chambers or domicile of an advocate unless the president of the bar association is informed of this by the investigating judge.
No interception may be made on a telephone line connecting the chambers or domicile of a judge or prosecutor unless the president or the prosecutor general of the court with jurisdiction over the area in question is informed of this by the investigating judge.
The formalities set out by the present article are prescribed under penalty of nullity.

BOOK IV
SOME SPECIFIC PROCEEDINGS

TITLE XXV
PROCEDURE APPLICABLE TO ORGANISED CRIME AND DELINQUENCY

CHAPTER II
PROCEDURE

SECTION IV
SEARCHES

Article 706-89
If the needs of a flagrance inquiry in relation to one of the offences falling within the scope of article 706-73 justify this, the liberty and custody judge of the district court may, at the request of the district prosecutor, authorise the searches, house visits and seizures of exhibits be carried out outside the times provided for by article 59, in accordance with the conditions provided for by article 706-92.

Article 706-90
If the needs of a preliminary investigation into one of the offences falling within the scope of article 706-73 justify this, the liberty and custody judge of the district court may, at the request of the district prosecutor, decide, in accordance with the provisions of article 706-92, that the searches, house visits and seizures of exhibits be carried out outside the times provided for by article 59 where these procedures do not involve inhabited dwellings.

Article 706-91
If the needs of an investigation into one of the offences falling within the scope of article 706-73 justify this, the investigating judge may, in accordance with the conditions provided for by article 706-92, authorise judicial police officers acting under rogatory commissions to carry out the searches, house visits and seizures of exhibits outside the times provided for by article 59 where these operations do not involve inhabited dwellings.
In urgent cases, the investigating judge may also authorise judicial police officers to carry out these procedures within inhabited dwellings:
1° in relation to a flagrant felony or misdemeanour;
2° where there is an immediate risk that evidence or clues will disappear;
3° where a reason or reasons exist to suspect that a person or persons to be found within the premises where the search is to be carried out are in the process of committing felonies or misdemeanours which fall within the scope of article 706-73.

Article 706-92
Under penalty of nullity, the authorisations provided for by articles 706-89 to 706-91 are given for specific searches and are the subject of written rulings, which specify the qualification of the offence for which the evidence is sought as well as the addresses of the premises in which the visits, searches and seizures may be carried out. This ruling, which is not open to appeal, must be supported by reasons indicating matters of fact and law which show these operations to be necessary. These operations are carried out under the supervision of the judge who authorised them, and who may visit the scene to ensure that the legal requirements are respected.
In the cases provided for by 1°, 2° and 3° of article 706-91, the ruling also contains the terms of the legal and factual considerations which form the basis of this decision, with reference only to the conditions provided for by these paragraphs.
For the application of the provisions of article 706-89 and 706-90, the liberty and custody judge of the district court whose district prosecutor leads the investigation is competent, regardless of which court is competent in the place where the investigation is to take place. The liberty and custody judge may then travel to the location anywhere on the national territory. The district prosecutor may also seise the liberty and custody judge of the district court where the search is to take place, through the intermediary of the district prosecutor of this court.

Article 706-93
Under penalty of nullity, the procedures provided for by articles 706-89 to 706-91 may have no other purpose than investigating and establishing the offences mentioned in the ruling by the liberty and custody judge or the investigating judge.
That these procedures reveal offences other than those mentioned in the ruling by the liberty and custody judge or the investigating judge does not constitute grounds for nullity in proceedings for related offences.

Article 706-94
Where, during the course of a flagrancy inquiry or a judicial investigation relating to one of the offences falling within the scope of article 706-73 the person in whose domicile a search is carried out is in custody or detained in another place, and transporting him to the scene appears undesirable as creating a serious risk to public order or that he might abscond, or because the evidence might disappear in the time necessary to bring him to the scene, the search may be carried out, with the prior agreement of the district prosecutor or of the investigating judge, in the presence of two witnesses recruited under the conditions provided for by the second paragraph of article 57, or of a representative nominated by the person whose domicile is involved.
The provisions of the present article also apply to preliminary inquiries, where the search is carried out without the consent of the person concerned, under the conditions provided for by articles 76 and 706-90. The consent is then given by the liberty and custody judge.