B. N. KATJU, A. C. J.

( 1 ) THESE are six applications under S. 482, Cr. P. C. praying that the first information report and the investigation on its basis be quashed end the opposite parties be directed to release the goods seized in favour of the applicants and the opposite parties be also directed not to arrest the applicants in pursuance of the first information report during the pendency of the application. The learned single Judge who heard these applications was of the view that the answers given by the Full Bench in the case of Prashant Gaur v. State of U. P. , 1988 All WC 828 to the questions referred to it with respect to the power of this Court to interfere with the investigation by the police did not appear to be in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court and the Privy Council.

( 2 ) THE questions referred to the Full Bench in the case of Prashant Gaur v. State of U. P. , (1988 All WC 828) (supra) and the answers given with respect to them are as follows :- Question No. 1 : ANSWER : whether under S. 482 Cr. P. C. the High Court has inherent powers to interfere with the investigation by the Police? investigation into an offence is a statutory function of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document