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

1998 (1) Crimes 243
MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.
E. Valsaraj, M.L.A. - Petitioner
versus
Chief Secretary cum Home
Secretary & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Original Petition No. 11627 of 1997
Decided on 29-10-1997
Counsel for the parties:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Asokan, Senior Counsel.
For the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2: Mr. T. Murugesan, P.P.
For the Respondent No.3: Mr. P. Rajamanickam, Spl. Public Prosecutor.

IMPORTANT POINT
It is well within the power of police to make a preliminary investigation into cognizable offence & then to decide about registration of case.

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Petition seeking direction to Superintendent of Police, SPE, C.B.I. (ACB) to investigate the complaint preferred to Inspector General of Police - Scope of jurisdiction for such direction - In a case of cognizable offence if the investigating officer decides not to investigate the offence, the Magistrate as well as High Court can intervene to direct for such investigation - Petitioner's representation a counter complaint was already under investigation with crime registered regarding bribing of MLAs - It was well within the powers of Police/CBI to make preliminary investigation & then to decide about the registration of case on petitioner's complaint. (Paras 6 to 13)

       Result: Petition disposed off accordingly.

       

JUDGMENT

M. Karpagavinayagam, J. - Mr. E. Valsaraj, a sitting M.L.A. in the Union Territory of Pondicherry and the Whip of the Congress. Legislature Party, has approached this Court through the petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. with the following prayer:

"This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the 3rd respondent (Superintendent of Police, SPE, CBI, (ACB), Madras) to investigate the complaint dated 18-3-1997 preferred to the 2nd respondent (Inspector General of Police, Union Territory of Pondicherry).

2. The facts culled out from the petition and the counter, which are relevant and required for the purpose of disposal of this petition, are given under:

(a) One Kandasamy. M.L.A. belonging to Tamil Manila Congress preferred a complaint to Kirumambakkam Police Station in Bahour Commune. Pondicherry, alleging that in the early hours of 13-3-1997 at about 1.30 midnight, the accused persons, namely. (1) D. Ramachandran. (2) Natarajan. (3) Kannan. (4) the driver of one V. Vaithilingam, the leader of the Opposition Party and (5) V. Vaithilingam had jointly in furtherance of a common intention offered a sum of Rs. 9,50,000/- to him as reward for doing them a favour in exercise of his legislative duty enabling them to destabilise the present coalition government by defection. This was registered in Crime No. 16/97 against the said accused persons.

(b) Another M.L.A. by name Rajasekaran, belonging to T.M.C. preferred yet another complaint to Katterikuppam Police Station stating that a similar attempt to cause his defection with an offer to pay a handsome amount was made by the above said persons to do a favour in his legislative duty by defecting in their favour. This was registered by the said police in Crime No. 18/97 against the above said persons.

(c) Both the complaints were made on the same day, that is, on 13-3-1997. On 17-3-1997, the Home Department. Government of Union Territory of Pondicherry, directed investigation of both the cases pertaining to the alleged bribing M.L.As, to be transferred to the Superintendent of Police (Vigilance and Anti-Corruption). On receipt of this order, the second respondent. Inspector General of Police, Pondicherry, directed both the cases with all the documents pertaining to the investigation to be handed over to the Superintendent of Police. Vigilance and Anti-corruption. The said Superintendent of Police as also directed to conduct enquiries into these two cases and submit a report to the Chief Secretary, Government of Pondicherry, within three days. Accordingly, the report was submitted on 21-3-1997.

(d) In the meantime, the second respondent. Inspector General of Police was officially corresponding with Joint Director. C.B.I., New Delhi for transfer of all the cases for investigation.

(e) On 18-3-1997 the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-corruption received through Chief Secretary Government of Pondicherry, a confidential note sent by the Lt. Governor, enclosing a representation dated 18-3-1997 signed by 9 members of the Legislative Assembly headed by V. Vaithilingam. Leader of the Opposition Party, with a direction that the Lt. Governor desired that the aforesaid representation be made as part of the enquiry/investigation into the recent case of bribing M.L.As. and others.

(f) On the same date, two other representations by three M.L.As, of AIADMK and Convenor D. Ramchandran to the Lt. Governor were also enclosed to the Superintendent of Police. Vigilance with direction that these representations be made as part of the enquiry/investigation as in the other one. Even prior to 18-3-1997, that is, on 16-3-1997 Communist Party (Marxist) through its secretary Balasubramanian also made a similar representation to the Lt. Governor, which was also forwarded to the S.P., Vigilance with same direction.

(g) On 28-4-1997 the Superintendent of Police. CBI/ACB. Madras sent a message requesting Chief Secretary of Pondicherry to direct the Superintendent of Police. Vigilance and Anti-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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