1. Petition under Article 32 seeking transfer of investigation of FIRs registered under the Indian Penal Code to an independent agency. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2024 Supreme(SC) 1132
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B. V. NAGARATHNA, PANKAJ MITHAL, JJ.
Kabir Shankar Bose – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 416 of 2020
Decided on : 04-12-2024
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Crimes investigation – No party, either accused or complainant/informant, is entitled to choose investigating agency or to insist for investigation of crime by a particular agency – Power to transfer inquiry or trial is exercised through intervention of constitutional courts in exceptional circumstances.
(2) Crimes investigation – Investigation should not only be credible but also appear to be credible – Law requires that justice may not only be done but it must appear to have been done – Matter of entrusting investigation to a particular agency is basically at discretion of court which has to be exercised on sound legal principles.
(1) Crimes investigation – No party, either accused or complainant/informant, is entitled to choose investigating agency or to insist for investigation of crime by a particular agency – Power to transfer inquiry or trial is exercised through intervention of constitutional courts in exceptional circumstances.
(2) Crimes investigation – Investigation should not only be credible but also appear to be credible – Law requires that justice may not only be done but it must appear to have been done – Matter of entrusting investigation to a particular agency is basically at discretion of court which has to be exercised on sound legal principles.
Subject
Criminal Law - Transfer of Investigation
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 173 [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 193] – Constitution of India – Article 32 – Crimes investigation – Petition seeking transfer of investigation in pursuance of FIRs to any independent agency – No party, either accused or complainant/informant, is entitled to choose investigating agency or to insist for investigation of crime by a particular agency – Power to transfer inquiry or trial is exercised through intervention of constitutional courts in exceptional circumstances and constitutional courts are expected to use the extraordinary power sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situation where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigation or where incident may have national or international ramifications or where it is necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing fundamental rights – Transfer of any investigation may not be ordered by court in a routine/perfunctory manner or merely for reason that one party makes allegations against other. (Paras 28 and 29)
(B) [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 193 [Erstwhile, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 173] – Constitution of India – Article 32 – Crimes investigation – Petition seeking transfer of investigation in pursuance of FIRs to any independent agency – Investigation should not only be credible but also appear to be credible – Law requires that justice may not only be done but it must appear to have been done – Matter of entrusting investigation to a particular agency is basically at discretion of court which has to be exercised on sound legal principles – Presence of complainant/informants are not very necessary before Court – Case involves investigation of role of CISF or its personnel which cannot be left in hands of local police also for reasons of conflicting interests – It is not appropriate to permit local police to examine conduct of CISF personnel in instant case – No prejudice would be caused to either of parties if investigation is conducted by an independent agency other than State police – Investigation in pursuance of two FIRs is at a nascent stage – Instead of keeping investigation pending for an indefinite period, investigation be transferred to CBI – State-respondents directed to handover investigation pursuant to two FIRs to CBI along with all records. (Paras 32, 33, 34, 35 and 36)
Facts of the case:
Petitioner who is an Advocate by profession as also being in politics contends that he has a fundamental right to have fair investigation in connection with FIR No.400 of 2020 dated 07.12.2020 lodged against him with Police Station Serampore, West Bengal under Sections 341, 323, 325, 326, 307, 354, 504, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code and FIR No. 401 of 2020 dated 07.12.2020 again with Police Station Serampore, West Bengal under Section 341, 325, 354A, 34 IPC. He has invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent authorities to transfer investigation in pursuance of the FIRs to any independent agency other than the local police, namely, Central Bureau of Investigation, [‘CBI’] or Special Investigation Team[In short ‘SIT’].
Findings of Court:
It is admitted on record that investigation in pursuance of two FIRs is at a nascent stage and that it had not proceeded any further, due to interim order dated 13.01.2021, till date. Therefore, it is but natural to get investigation completed at the earliest. Primary object is to ensure fair completion of investigation so that, if necessary, trial may proceed.
Result : Writ Petition allowed.
Judgement Key Points
Please provide the legal document content (e.g., within
Legal Category Hierarchy
- constitutional law
- crime and sentencing
Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Mahesh Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amit Mishra, Adv. Mr. Surjendu Sankar Das, AOR Ms. Annie Mittal, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet, Adv. Ms. Mitakshara, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Shreyas Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ashish Raghuwanshi, Adv. Ms. Ripul Swati Kumari, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G. Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, Adv. Mr. Navanjay Mahapatra, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Zoheb Hossain, AOR
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Mahesh Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amit Mishra, Adv. Mr. Surjendu Sankar Das, AOR Ms. Annie Mittal, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet, Adv. Ms. Mitakshara, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Shreyas Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ashish Raghuwanshi, Adv. Ms. Ripul Swati Kumari, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G. Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, Adv. Mr. Navanjay Mahapatra, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Zoheb Hossain, AOR
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner alleges political bias and vendetta; respondents argue the FIRs disclose cognizable offences and that the petitioner failed to exhaust alternative remedies. (Para 11 , 12 , 20 , 22 )
3. The politically charged atmosphere and conflict of interest regarding security personnel's conduct make a fair investigation by local police unlikely. (Para 26 , 34 , 35 )
4. Transfer of investigation to an independent agency is warranted in exceptional circumstances to ensure credibility, instill confidence, and protect the fundamental right to fair investigation. (Para 29 , 32 )
5. Writ of mandamus issued directing the transfer of investigation of the FIRs to the Central Bureau of Investigation. (Para 36 , 37 )
6. When can a constitutional court transfer a criminal investigation to an independent agency?
Transfer is permitted in exceptional circumstances to provide credibility, instill confidence, where the incident has national or international ramifications, or to ensure complete justice and enforce fundamental rights. (Para 29 )
7. Is a party entitled to choose the investigating agency for a crime?
No, neither the accused nor the complainant is entitled to choose the investigating agency or insist that a crime be investigated by a particular agency. (Para 28 )
8. What is the legal standard regarding the credibility of a criminal investigation?
An investigation must not only be credible but must also appear to be credible, ensuring that justice is not only done but is seen to have been done. (Para 32 )
9. Under what conditions is transfer to an independent agency appropriate when state officials are involved?
Transfer is appropriate where high officials of state authorities are involved or the investigating agency's top officials may influence the probe, making the investigation likely to be tainted. (Para 31 )
JUDGMENT :
PANKAJ MITHAL, J.
1. We have heard Shri Mahesh Jethmalani, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India for the CBI, Shri Vikramjeet Banerjee, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, for the CISF, Ms. Astha Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the State of West Bengal and Shri Zoheb Hossain, learned counsel for respondent No. 7.
2. The petitioner who is an advocate by profession as also being in politics contends that he has a fundamental right to have a fair investigation in connection with FIR No.400 of 2020 dated 07.12.2020 lodged against him with Police Station Serampore, West Bengal under Sections 341, 323, 325, 326, 307, 354, 504, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code1[In short ‘IPC’] and FIR No. 401 of 2020 dated 07.12.2020 again with Police Station Serampore, West Bengal under Section 341, 325, 354A, 34 IPC. He therefore, has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to transfer the investigation in pursuance of the above FIRs to any independent agency other than the local police, namely, the Central Bureau of Investigation, 2[In short ‘CBI’] or Special Investigation Team3[In short ‘SIT’].
3. The Writ Petition was entertained by the three Judge Bench of this Court. On 13.01.2021 while issuing notice to the State-respondents, proceedings in pursuance to the aforesaid FIRs were stayed. Thereafter, the respondents i.e. State of West Bengal, Central Industrial Security Force4[In short ‘CISF’] and the CBI have filed separate replies to the writ petition. Another counter-affidavit has been filed by the private respondent No.7 opposing the writ petition.
4. Ordinarily we would have relegated the petitioner to the High Court to seek appropriate remedy in connection with the reliefs claimed here in this petition but we refrain from doing so after the petition had been entertained and the parties have exchanged the necessary pleadings which are sufficient to adjudicate the matter on merits.
5. It may be pertinent to mention here that on account of the interim order passed in this petition on 13.01.2021, the local police had not proceeded in this matter and as such no investigation has been done pursuant to the above FIRs.
6. The petitioner alleges that he was married on 18.11.2010 to the daughter of Mr. Kalyan Banerjee, respondent No.7, a sitting Member of Parliament5[In short ‘MP’] from Serampore Lok Sabha constituency but the said marriage could not last long and was dissolved in terms of the settlement between the parties vide order dated 06.03.2018 passed by this Court in Transfer Petition (C) No. 1988 of 2015 wherein apart from dissolving the marriage, it was ordered that all pending litigations between the parties would stand quashed. However, the father of the petitioner’s ex-wife continued to harass the petitioner and pressurized the state administration to victimise and torture him.
7. Accordingly, on the request of the petitioner on 11.01.2019, he was granted CISF security owing to political vendetta and threats extended to him allegedly by the State Government and his ex-father-in-law.
8. The petitioner alleges that on 06.12.2020 his house and car were surrounded by 200 Trinamool Congress6[In short ‘TMC’] goons when he was about to leave his house at Serampore along with CISF security guards. His life was saved by his guards who also suffered injuries in the melee to protect him. The local police failed to take any action, rather, under political pressure, FIR No.400 of 2020 was registered against the petitioner at the behest of one Santosh Kumar Singh @ Pappu Singh on 07.12.2020 with Police Station Serampore, West Bengal under Sections 341, 323, 325, 326, 307, 354, 504, 506, 34 IPC.
9. It was followed by another FIR No.401 of 2020 on 07.12.2020 with Police Station Serampore, West Bengal under Sections 341, 325, 354A, 34 IPC which was lodged by one
