Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2009 Supreme(Mad) 3982

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R. SHIVAKUMAR
V.P. Kuppurao
Versus
The Director General of Police TamilNadu Government DGP Office Mylapore & Others
Crl.O.P.Nos.3580 of 2009 to 3585 of 2009 & M.P.No.1 of 2009
Decided on: 05-10-2009

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:R. Sankarasubbu, Advocate.
For the Respondent:R1 to R3, Kumaresan, Addl. Public Prosecutor, for I. Paul Nobel Devakumar, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side), R4, N. Chandrasekaran, Spl. Public Prosecutor for CBI Cases.

Ratios:
a. All police officers of the rank of Dy. S.P. are not eligible to be appointed as investigating officers to investigate the offences under the S.C. & S.T. Act. They have to be appointed to any particular or group of cases after considering their past experience, sense of ability and justice to perceive the implications of the case and investigate it along with right lines within the shortest possible time.
b. Though it is permissible for the Government or D.G.P. to pass general orders prescribing the officers who shall investigate the cases arising from a particular area, generally, it is desirable to name such officers case-wise.
c. The restrictive clause for consideration of the qualities mentioned in Rule 7(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 shall be applicable only when the officers below the rank of S.P. viz. Addl. S.P., Asst. S.P. or Dy. S.P., are sought to be appointed as Investigating Officers and such restriction shall not be applicable in case of appointment of the S.P. or the officers above such rank as investigating officers since S.P. is one of the appointing authorities under Rule 7(1).

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(2 of 1974)-Sec.482-Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989) -Sec.17, 21-Investigation-Investigating officer-Transfer of Investigation-Rank of officer-CBI-On the reports of the petitioner, cases were registered against police officers-Remain uninvestigated for long time-Petitioner prayed for transfer to CBI-He contended that since the accused were police officers, the cases were not investigated properly-State contended that by general orders, investigating officers were appointed to investigate the cases-Held, Investigating officers to investigate the offences under S.C. & S.T. Act are not to be appointed generally for any territory. They have to be appointed to any particular or group of cases after considering their qualities and suitability and the nature of the case -General guidelines issued regarding the appointment of investigating officers -Cases were directed to be transferred to the officer superior in rank to that of S.P.-Petitions partly allowed.
       (B) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989) -Sec.17, 21-Investigation-Investigating officer-Rank of officer-All police officers of the rank of Dy. S.P. are not eligible to be appointed as investigating officers to investigate the offences under the S.C. & S.T. Act. They have to be appointed to any particular or group of cases after considering their past experience, sense of ability and justice to perceive the implications of the case and investigate it along with right lines within the shortest possible time.
        Whether all police officers in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and above is competent to be appointed as the Investigating Officer? The answer to the said question is "NO". The Investigating Officer shall be appointed by the State Government/Director General of Police/ Superintendent of Police after taking into account the officer’s past experience, sense of ability and justice to perceive the implications of the case and investigate it along with right lines within the shortest possible time.
       Para 16
       (C) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989) -Sec.17, 21-Investigation-Investigating officer-Though it is permissible for the Government or D.G.P. to pass general orders prescribing the officers who shall investigate the cases arising from a particular area, generally, it is desirable to name such officers case-wise.
       It is permissible for the Government/ Director General of Police/ Superintendent of Police concerned to pass general orders prescribing the officers who shall investigate the cases arising from a particular area. But the mere fact that such orders are permissible will not permit passing of orders which will defeat the very purpose for which such rule has been framed. A conjoint reading of Rule 7(1) and Rule 12(3) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 will make it clear that it is desirable that the appointment of Investigating Officer is made case-wise. However, as pointed out supra, it is permissible that general orders prescribing the officers by whom cases under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 arising within a particular area are to be investigated may be issued. Para 17
       (D) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989) -Sec.17, 21-Investigation-Investigating officer-General guidelines issued regarding the appointment of investigating officers.
       This court wants to issue the following comprehensive directions regarding appointment of Investigating Officers in cases involving commission of offences punishable under the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989:-
       i. As per Rule 7(1) only police officers not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police/Assistant Superintendent of Police (Sub-divisional Officers) can be appointed as Investigating Officers.
       ii. Before appointing a person as Investigating Officer to investigate a case involving the commission of offences punishable under the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the qualities of such officer indicated in Rule 7(1) should be considered.
       iii. The restrictive clause for consideration of the qualities mentioned in Rule 7(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 shall be applicable only when the officers below the rank of Superintendent of Police viz. Additional Superintendent of Police, Assistant Superintendent of Police or Deputy Superintendent of Police, are sought to be appointed as Investigating Officers and such restriction shall not be applicable in case of appointment of the Superintendent of Police or the officers above such rank as investigating officers since Superintendent of Police is one of the appointing authorities under Rule 7(1).
       iv. The appointment of Investigating Officers may be made on case to case basis. But there is no prohibition for issuing general directions for appointment of Investigating Officers provided such general directions are in conformity with Rule 7(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995. .. …. …. Such general circular shall also contain a direction as to which other officer is to be appointed as the Investigating Officer, in case the name of a particular sub-divisional police officer posted to a particular sub-division is not found in the approved list.
       v. Such general directions shall also be read subject to an exception that the State Government or Director General of Police or the Superintendent of Police concerned may appoint any other competent officer, whose name is found in such a list as investigating officer for a particular case.
       vi. Till such a list is prepared, the appointment of investigating officer shall be made on case to case basis after considering the qualities of the officer as prescribed under Rule 7(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995.
       vii. In case a police officer in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and above figures as an accused in a case, then it is desirable to have a higher official of the police department as the Investigating Officer.
       Para 25

Judgment :-

All these petitions have been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking orders directing the transfer of the investigation in Cr.Nos.17/2007 to 22/2007 registered on the file of District Crime Branch, Vellore against the then Superintendent of Police, Vellore District and Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vellore Sub-Division to the Central Bureau of Investigation. All the above said cases were registered based on the complaint of V.P.Kuppu Rao, a retired Inspector of Police, who is the petitioner in all these petitions.

2. The crux of the allegation made in each one of the criminal cases, investigation of which is sought to be transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation, is that the concerned police officer (Superintendent of Police/ Deputy Superintendent of Police) committed willful negligence in discharge of his duties in the registration and investigation of the cases based on the complaint of the Petitioner alleging commission of offences of atrocities on a member of a scheduled caste, punishable under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. All the above said cases were registered based on the orders of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Judicial Magistrate based on the private complaint preferred by the petitioner herein, directing registration and investigation of cases based on the complaints.

3. Cr.No.17/2007 was registered for alleged offences under sections 221, 218, 119, 166, 167, 466 IPC and 154(1) & 2(1)(2) of Cr.P.C along with offences punishable under Sections 3(ii)(v) and (vii) and Section 4 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and also an offence punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. The sole accused therein is one Mr.Pattabi, who was the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vellore Sub-division at the time of alleged occurrence who had been transferred and functioning as Deputy Superintendent of Police, Katpadi at the time of registration of the case on 04.07.2007.

4. Cr.No.18/2007 was registered for alleged offences under sections 221, 107 and 506

(ii) IPC and Section 17 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Section 3(ii)(v) and (vii) and Section 4 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and also an offence punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 r/w 200 Cr.P.C and 156(3) Cr.P.C. The sole accused therein is one Mr.M.Ashok Kumar, who was the then Superintendent of Police, Vellore District at the time of alleged occurrence who had been transferred and functioning as Superintendent of Police in Q Branch, Chennai at the time of registration of the case on 04.07.2007.

5. Cr.No.19/2007 was registered for alleged offences under sections 221, 119, 166, 218, 219 & 167 of IPC and Section 154(1)(2) & (3) of Cr.P.C, 107 and 506(ii) IPC and Section 17 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Section 3(ii)(vI) and (vii) and Section 4 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and also an offence punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 r/w 156(3) Cr.P.C. The sole accused therein is one Mr.M.Ashok Kumar, who was the then Superintendent of Police, Vellore District at the time of alleged occurrence who had been transferred and functioning as Superintendent of Police in Q Branch, Chennai at the time of registration of the case on 04.07.2007.

6. Cr.No.20/2007 was registered for alleged offences under sections 221, 119, 166, 218, 219 & 167 of IPC and Section 154(1)(2) & (3) of Cr.P.C, 107 and 506(ii) IPC and Section 17 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Section 3(ii)(vI) and (vii) and Section 4 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and also an offence punishab

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2009 Supreme(Mad) 3982

High Court of Judicature at Madras THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R. SHIVAKUMAR V.P. Kuppurao Versus The Director General of Police TamilNadu Government DGP Office Mylapore & Others Crl.O.P.Nos.3580 of 2009 to 3585 of 2009 & M.P.No.1 of 2009Decided on: 05-10-2009

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R. SHIVAKUMAR
V.P. Kuppurao
Versus
The Director General of Police TamilNadu Government DGP Office Mylapore & Others
Crl.O.P.Nos.3580 of 2009 to 3585 of 2009 & M.P.No.1 of 2009
Decided on: 05-10-2009