2009 Supreme(SC) 734

2009(4) Supreme 85
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.B. Sinha and Cyriac Joseph, JJ.
Manoj Narain Agrawal — Appellant
versus
Shashi Agrawal & Ors. — Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 725 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5419 of 2008)
WITH
Criminal Appeal Nos. 726-727 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP (Criminal) Nos.6061-6062)
Decided on : 15-04-2009

IMPORTANT POINT
Jurisdiction of High Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is limited.

Headnote:(a) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 173 – CBCID after seeking opinion of the public prosecutor on the final report continuing investigation – Though the course adopted may be irregular, Police is entitled to continue investigation even after submitting final report – Even if the report had been accepted, complainant was entitled to notice and file objections. (Paras 19, 20 and 22)

        (1980) 2 SCC 91; (1979) 2 SCC 322; (2008) 2 SCC 383; (1999) 5 SCC 740 – Relied upon.

        (b) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – Principles in relation to the exercise of the inherent power of the High Court re-stated. (Para 25)

        (1999) 6 SCC 146; (2008) 1 SCC 474 – Relied upon.

        (c) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – Jurisdiction of High Court is limited – It can interfere with an order of summoning an accused by the learned Magistrate inter alia in the event if a finding is arrived at that the accused were being prosecuted mala fide and/or even if the allegations contained in the FIR are given face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, no case has been made out for taking cognizance of the offence. (Para 26)

        1992 Suppl. (1) SCC 335; (2005) 3 SCC 299 – Relied upon.

        (d) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 173 – Further investigation can be directed to be made even after an order taking cognizance has been passed. (Para 29)

        (e) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – Jurisdiction u/s 482 is limited – Bail and exemption from appearance cannot be granted u/s 482. (Para 31)

       Facts of the case :

        1. In relation to an incident which took place on or about 4.11.1999, two First Information Reports were lodged; one on 4.11.1999 and the other on the next day, i.e., 5.11.1999. The first FIR was lodged by Meenaxi Agrawal alleging that Manoj Narain Agrawal along with forty others raided their farm house and attacked Shashi Agrawal and Meenaxi as also staff members thereof as a result whereof one R.K. Yadav, an employee suffered grievous injuries. The accused were allegedly arrested on the spot by the local police.

        2. Another FIR was lodged by Manoj alleging that D.S. Sirohi, Manager of Parag Farm, Kichha uttered filthy language over his mobile calling names to mother, sister and also threatened to kill him and when he reached there, some guards of the Farm, namely, Hans Pal, Munna Lal, Dharmender, etc. opened fire at him indiscriminately in order to kill him on the order of D.S. Sirohi, Manager of Farm, R.K. Yadav and Meenaxi. One pellet hit him near his heart. It was also stated that he was mercilessly beaten up by some of the employees of Meenaxi. This was registered as FIR No.960A/99. Manoj also alleged forgery of some documents on the basis whereof some orders had been obtained by them in getting their names mutated in the revenue record.

        3. A final report dated 29.11.1999 was filed in respect of FIR No.960A/99, stating that no case was made out against Shashi and Meenaxi.

        4. Manoj had filed a writ petition being praying for a fair investigation and also for appointment of another investigating officer in the Crime No. 960A/99. The High Court disposed of the said Writ Petition directing the DIG (Kumaun Region) Udham Singh Nagar, Nainital to ensure fair and impartial investigation with respect to the Crime Case No. 960A/99 by another agency.

        5. A direction was issued by the State of U.P that Crime No. 960A/99 be investigated by CBCID pursuant whereto the investigation was taken over by CBCID, but on or about 11.5.2000, the investigation was transferred from CBCID to local police.

        6. This order was challenged both by Shashi and Manoj by way of writ petitions. High Court passed an interim order staying the arrest of the petitioners. High Court also directed the investigating agency to carry out the investigation fairly and honestly and not to take any coercive steps against the parties.

        7. This order was quashed by Supreme Court and the CBCID was directed to conclude the investigation and to submit its report.

        8. In the meanwhile Manoj was convicted under Section 324 of the IPC.

        9. An appeal thereagainst is pending before the High Court. The sentence passed against Manoj has also been suspended and he has been granted bail.

        10. Charge sheet was filed against Shashi and Meenaxi under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504 and 506 of the IPC. Cognizance of the said offence was taken and summons were said to have been issued against them.

        11. A Criminal Miscellaneous Application filed before the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the said criminal proceedings was dismissed.

        12. The third respondent was permitted to investigate into the matter further against Shashi and Meenaxi.

        13. A Criminal Miscellaneous Application filed thereagainst under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.

       Finding of the Court :

        High Court went beyond its jurisdiction u/s 482.

       Result : Appeal disposed of.