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

2013 Supreme(Raj) 523

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Sandeep Mehta, J.
Narayan Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan and Anr. - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 3150 of 2012.
Decided On : 2-01-2013

Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Dhirendra Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Rajlaxmi, Public Prosecutor.

The importance of considering the petitioner's representation in its entirety before concluding the investigation.

Headnote:

Fair Investigation - Direction for Fair Investigation of FIR - The court directed the Investigating Officer to consider the petitioner's representation in its entirety before filing the result of the investigation in the competent Court.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a petition seeking a direction for fair investigation of an FIR registered for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court directed the Investigating Officer to consider the petitioner's representation before filing the result of the investigation.

Issues: Fair investigation of the FIR, consideration of petitioner's representation by the Investigating Officer.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner's representation in its entirety before concluding the investigation.

Final Decision: The misc. petition was disposed of with a direction for the Investigating Officer to consider the petitioner's representation before filing the result of the investigation.

JUDGMENT

1. - The instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction for fair investigation of the FIR No. 105/2012 registered at the Police Station ACB Rajsamand, Police Station CPS ACB, Jaipur for the offence under Section 13 (1)(E) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made various representations to the Investigating Officer in which all the assets of the petitioner have been explained but the Investigating Officer is not taking the same on record. He, therefore, prays that a direction be issued to the Investigating Officer to consider the petitioner's representation so that a proper assessment of the petitioner's actual income vis-a-vis his assets can be done.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor accepts notice on behalf of the State and does not object to the propositions that the petitioner's representation should be considered by the Investigating Officer.

4. Accordingly, the misc. petition is disposed of with a direction that the Investigating Officer shall consider the representation of the petitioner in its entirety before filing the result of the investigation in the competent Court.Stay petition is also disposed of.Petition disposed of.

*******


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