A.K.RAJAN
Lourdumary – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
1. These petitions, though the prayers are worded differently, in effect it is to investigate the case and to register the complaint.
2. These petitions are filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. As per the Judgment of the Supreme Court in State of West Bengal v. S.N.Basak , AIR 1963 SC 447 and Hazari Lal Gupta v. Rameshwar Prasad and another , AIR 1972 SC 484, it has been held that the statutory right of Police to carry on investigation into cognizable offence cannot be interfered with under Sections 401 and 482 before launching prosecution. Interference with such investigation would be impeding investigation and jurisdiction of statutory authorities to exercise the power in accordance with Cr.P.C. The Supreme Court held so in these two cases following its earlier decision in R.P.Kapur v. State of Punjab , AIR 1960 SC 866, held that:
“The High Court does not interfere with such investigation because it would then, be impeding investigation and jurisdiction of statutory authorities to exercise powers in accordance with the provisions of the Cr.P.C. The High Court was correct in dismissing the application filed under Section 561(A) of the Cr.P.C.”
In State v. Bajanlal, AIR 1
1. State of West Bengal v. S.N.Basak
2. Hazari Lal Gupta v. Rameshwar Prasad and another
3. R.P.Kapur v. State of Punjab
6. State rep. by CBI v. Anil Sharma
7. State of Bihar and another v. P.P.Shanna and another
8. Eastern Spinning Mill v. Rajiv, AIR 1985 SC 1668(Para 2); Union of India v. Shushil Kumar Modi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.