SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(SC) 1004

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, JJ.
STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. – APPELLANTS
VERSUS
LALU SINGH – RESPONDENT
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1883 OF 2013 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 7066 OF 2009)
Decided On : 29-10-2013

IMPORTANT POINT
Inspector CID is competent to file charge sheet.

Headnote:Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 173(2) and 36 r/w Rule 431 (1)(b), Police Manual - Inspector CID superior in rank to an officer-in-charge of a police station - Authorised to exercise powers of an officer-in-charge of a police station - Inspector CID filing charge sheet - No infirmity. (Para 12)

       (2007) 1 SCC 110 - Distinguished

       Facts of the case:

        The observations of the High Court in Criminal Writ petition are under challenge in this appeal.

       Finding of the Court:

        High Court has taken an erroneous view.

       Result : Appeal allowed.

       

JUDGMENT

CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, J.

While dismissing the Writ Petition, the High Court has made observations which have far reaching consequences and accordingly the State of Bihar, aggrieved by the same has preferred this Special Leave Petition. The observations made read as follows:

“I have no doubt in taking this view that under Section 36 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the higher police officials have got same powers as available to the officer-in-charge of a police station under them but the power is available only with respect to supervising the investigation or participating into the investigation to some extent but under section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the final view over the investigation of a case with regard to filing charge sheet or final form has to be taken by the concerned officer-in-charge only and he only has the authority to file the charge sheet in the case”

While doing so, however, the High Court has not quashed the report submitted by the Inspector of the Criminal Investigation Department of the State Government.

It is the aforesaid observation, which is the subject matter of this special leave petition.

Leave granted.

Facts lie in a narrow compass:

On the basis of an oral statement made by one Shail Kumari Devi before the officer-in-charge of Marhaura Police Station, Marhaura, P.S. Case No. 148 of 2004 was registered under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The officer-in-charge of the Police Station took up the investigation, but before he could complete the same, and submit report in terms of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the “Code”), the Director General of Police entrusted the investigation to the Criminal Investigation Department, (hereinafter referred to as “C.I.D.”) and the task for conducting the investigation was assigned to an Inspector. The Inspector of C.I.D. conducted the investigation and submitted the charge-sheet against the accused persons. On consideration of the charge-sheet and the materials collected during the course of investigation, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran took cognizance of the offence and directed for issuance of process. One of the accused, namely Lalu Singh, aggrieved by the same, preferred writ petition before the High Court for quashing the prosecution, inter alia, on the ground that under Section 173(2) of the Code only an officer in-charge of a Police station has the authority to do that and, therefore, the charge-sheet submitted by the Inspector, C.I.D. is fit to be quashed.

The High Court considered the aforesaid submission and though it declined to quash the charge-sheet, it made the observation quoted above and held that it is the officer-in-charge only who can file the charge-sheet.

We have heard Mr. Manish Kumar, learned Counsel for the appellants and Mr. Nagendra Rai, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent.

Mr. Kumar contends that the Inspector of C.I.D. possesses the power to submit report under Section 173(2) of the Code and the observation made by the High Court is erroneous. Mr. Rai, however, submits that in the facts of the present case, the High court was justified in making the observations as quoted above.

In view of the rival submissions, we deem it expedient to analyse the scheme of the Code and the provisions of the Bihar Police Manual. Section 173 of the Code contemplates submission of report on completion of investigation. Section 173(2) of the Code which is relevant for the purpose reads as follows:

“173 – Report of police officer on completion of investigation-

(1) xxx xxx xxx

(2)(i) As soon as it is completed, the officer in charge of the police station shall forward to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence on a police report, a report in the form prescribed by the State Government, stating –

(a) the names of the parties;

(b) the nature of the information;

(c) the names of the persons who appear to be acquainted with the circumsta


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top