The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C to entrust the investigation to an independent agency to secure the ends of justice and rule out any bias, while ensuring the right to fair trial for the victim and the society.

Judgment

Mr. Harpreet Singh Brar, J.

The petitioner has approached this Court by filing present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for issuance of directions to respondents No. 1 to 3 to entrust the investigation in FIR No.0049 dated 28.01.2023 under Sections 302/34 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Sector 10, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) to an independent agency like Central Bureau of Investigation.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. The facts in brief are that the deceased husband of the petitioner was a property dealer working along with respondents No.4 to 8. Due to a monetary dispute qua a land deal, the relationship between her husband and other partners soured to the point where the private respondents even threatened to kill him. Allegedly, respondent No.5, namely, Kalu Patli @ Devender owed Rs.2 Crores and respondents No.4, 6 & 7 owed around Rs.9 Crores to the husband of the petitioner which was never paid back despite repeated requests made by him. On 04.01.2023, husband of the petitioner informed her that he is going out to settle the accounts with the private respondents. However, her husband did not return and was nowhere to be found even after an extensive search. Then, on 06.01.2023, the petitioner went to lodge a missing complaint at Police Station Rajender Park and got a call from Hayatpur Police Chowki informing her that bullet ridden dead body of her husband has been found near the railway line near Dwarka Expressway.

CONTENTIONS

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that from the very inception, the jurisdictional police authorities are trying to shield the culprits. The investigation has been subverted in a calculated manner to cover up the case. The Investigating Officer has introduced false witnesses and arbitrarily recorded the statements of real witnesses. Further, all the incriminating material was also not brought on record to help the accused. In spite of the fact that the petitioner had filed the complaint on 06.01.2023 i.e. the date of occurrence itself, wherein, the names of the accused and the motive is clearly stated, the FIR was only registered after 21 days i.e. on 28.01.2023. Furthermore, a country made pistol and live cartridge were also recovered from the place of occurrence and yet the local police has not arrested the accused. Even though the scientific evidence in the shape of ballistic report dated 07.03.2023 clearly proves that it is a case of murder, the local police has not made any effort to interrogate the accused. The post-mortem report of the husband of the petitioner clearly states that he died due to firearm injury. The petitioner has given multiple complaints dated 15.02.2023, 01.03.2023 & 10.04.2023 (Annexure P-6) (colly) to change the Investigating Officer but neither the Investigating Officer was changed nor the investigation has been concluded even after passing of more than one year. The aforementioned facts clearly vindicates the apprehension of the petitioner that the accused persons are very influential and the jurisdictional police is acting under their influence and as such, the petitioner was left with no other choice but to approach this Court by filing the instant petition on 23.08.2023. Even till date, the Investigating Officer has not done anything tangible to allay the apprehensions of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has lost all hopes of getting justice from the jurisdictional police authorities.

4. Per contra, the learned State counsel refers to the status report dated 31.01.2024, wherein, assurance was given that the investigation will be brought to its logical conclusion and submits that the Investigating Officer is making all efforts to complete the investigation. Respondents No.5 to 9 who were named as accused by the petitioner were joined in the investigation, however, nothing incriminating has surfaced. It is further contended that the investigation is now entrusted to C