Supreme Court Reports [2011] 11 S.C.R
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
[2011] 11 S.C.R. 281 282 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 11 S.C.R. STATE OF PUNJAB A A news item and issued notices to the State Government, v. Senior Police Officials and directed the Deputy CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS. Superintendent of Police to file the status report of the (SLP (Criminal) No. 792 of 2008) investigation of the case. Subsequently, fifth FIR was registered u/ss. 376, 342 and 34 IPC. Thereafter, DSP filed SEPTEMBER 02, 2011 B B a status report as also two Municipal Councilors of the [R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.] District filed an application alleging that many innocent persons were implicated in the FIR registered by Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss. 173 (8) and 482 respondent No. 3 at the instance of local influential – Investigation into FIR – Charge-sheet filed u/s. 173 against political persons and police officials/officers, and accused person – Also three more FIRs lodged – C C apprehended that the investigation might not be fair and Subsequently, news item published in newspaper – High Court proper. Meanwhile, the Additional Director General of taking suo motu notice and directing CBI to investigate into Police entrusted the investigation into the previous four the case – Correctness of – Held: In a case where charge- FIRs to a special investigation team(SIT). The High Court sheet has been filed, s. 173(8) cannot limit or affect the holding that the SIT had been constituted without the inherent powers of the High Court to pass an order u/s.482 D D permission of the court directed that the investigation of for fresh investigation or re-investigation if the High Court is the cases be carried out by CBI in the interest of justice satisfied that such fresh investigation or re-investigation is in exercise of its power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the necessary to secure the ends of justice – As regards appellant-State filed the instant Special Leave Petition. investigation by CBI, the High Court held that investigation Dismissing the Special Leave Petition, the Court of the case by the investigating officer, even of the rank of E E DSP would not be fair and truthful because senior HELD: 1.1 Under sub-section (2) of Section 173 functionaries of the State police and political leaders were Cr.P.C. a police report (charge sheet or challan) is filed involved, and justice would not be done if local police by the police after investigation is complete. Sub-section investigated – Thus, direction of High Court for investigation (8) of Section 173 states that nothing in the Section shall by CBI was justified. F F be deemed to preclude any further investigation in respect of an offence after a report under sub-section (2) Respondent No. 3 filed an FIR against her husband has been forwarded to the Magistrate. Thus, even where and ‘SK’ alleging offences u/ss. 366, 376, 406, 420, 506, charge sheet or challan has been filed by the police 344 read with s. 34 IPC. Pursuant thereto, investigation under sub-section (2) of Section 173, the police can was carried out. Charge-sheet was submitted in the court undertake further investigation but not fresh investigation G G u/s. 173 Cr.P.C. naming few persons as accused. This or re-investigation in respect of an offence under sub- resulted in registration of three more FIRs and the same section (8) of Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. [Para 13] [294-C- were also investigated. Thereafter, a news item was E] published in the newspaper headlined ‘Moga Sex Scandal. The High Court took suo motu notice of the 1.2 Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., however, states that 281 H H nothing in the Cr.P.C. shall be deemed to limit or affect STATE OF PUNJAB v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF 283 284 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 11 S.C.R. INVESTIGATION & ORS. the inherent powers of the High Court to make such A A political leaders were to be named and political and orders as is necessary to give effect to any order under administrative compulsions were making it difficult for the the Cr.P.C. or to prevent the abuse of the process of any investigating team to go any further to bring home the Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Thus, truth. It further observed that not less than eight police the provisions of the Cr.P.C. do not limit or affect the officials, political leaders, advocates, municipal inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders B B councilors besides a number of persons belonging to as may be necessary to give effect to any order under general public had been named in the status report of the the Court or to prevent the abuse of any process of the State local police. In the peculiar facts and circumstances Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. The of the case, the High Court felt that justice would not be language of sub-section (8) of Section 173 of the Cr.P.C., done to the case if the investigation stays in the hands therefore, cannot limit or affect the inherent powers of the C C of the local police and for these reasons directed that the High Court to pass an order under Section 482 of the investigation of the case be handed over to the CBI. The Cr.P.C. for fresh investigation or re-investigation if the narration of the facts and circumstances of this judgment High Court is satisfied that such fresh investigation or re- also support the conclusion of the High Court that investigation is necessary to secure the ends of justice. investigation by an independent agency such as the CBI [Para 14] [294-F-H; 295-A] D D was absolutely necessary in the interests of justice. Moreover, even though the High Court in the impugned 1.3 The investigating agency or the court subordinate order did make a mention that in case challan has been to the High Court exercising powers under Cr.P.C. have filed, then the petition will stand as having become to exercise the powers within the four corners of the infructuous in the order dated 12.12.2007, the High Court Cr.P.C. and this would mean that the investigating stayed further proceedings before the trial court in the E E agency may undertake further investigation and the case arising out of the FIR registered by respondent No. subordinate court may direct further investigation into the 3 till further orders. Thus, the High Court was of the view case where charge sheet has been filed under sub- that even though investigation is complete in one case section (2) of Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. and such further and charge sheet has been filed by the Police, it was investigation will not mean fresh investigation or re- necessary in the ends of justice that the CBI should carry investigation. But these limitations in sub-section (8) of F F out an investigation into the case. Therefore, it is not a Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. in a case where charge sheet fit case in which power should be exercised under Article has been filed will not apply to the exercise of inherent 136 of the Constitution and grant leave to appeal. [Paras powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 17 and 19] [298-D-H; 299-G-H] for securing the ends of justice. [Para 15] [296-B-D] G G Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1998) 1 SCC 226: 1997 1.4 On a reading of the reasons given by the High (6) Suppl.SCR 595; Mithabhai Pashabhai Patel v. State of Court, it is found that the High Court was of the view that Gujarat (2009) 6 SCC 332: 2009 (7) SCR 1126; Ram Lal the investigating officer even of the rank of DSP was not Narang v. State (Delhi Administration (1979) 2 SCC 322; in a position to investigate the case fairly and truthfully Nirmal Singh Kahlon v. State of Punjab and Ors. (2009) 1 because senior functionaries of the State police and H H SCC 441: 2008 (14) SCR 1049; State of West Bengal and STATE OF PUNJAB v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF 285 286 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 11 S.C.R. INVESTIGATION & ORS. Ors. v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West A A Simran Kaur @ Indu and her husband Ajay Kumar alleging Bengal and Ors. (2010) 2 SCC 571 – referred to. offences under Sections 366, 376, 406, 420, 506, 344 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘the IPC’). Case Law Reference: Pursuant to the FIR, Simran Kaur and Ajay Kumar were 1997 (6) Suppl. SCR 595 Referred to Para 8 arrested on 19.04.2007, but Ajay Kumar managed to escape B B from the custody of police and FIR No. 83, Police Station City- 2009 (7) SCR 1126 Referred to Para 8 I, Moga dated 19.04.2007 under Section 224 of the IPC was (1979) 2 SCC 322 Referred to Para 10 registered against him. In course of investigation of the case, respondent no.3 made a statement before the police under 2008 (14) SCR 1049 Referred to Para 16 Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Cr.P.C.’) on 23.04.2007 naming 14 other persons who had (2010) 2 SCC 571 Referred to Para 18 C C sex with her against her will and some of these persons were CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave arrested by Sub-Inspector Raman Kumar.