Back
2005 Supreme(MP) 1090
2006(3) JLJ 366
S.S. Jha and S.A. Naqvi, JJ.
Sanjay Singh and others v. State of M.P. and others
Writ Petition No. 2784 of 2005; Decided on 7.11.2005.
Brijesh Sharma and Smt. Ami Prabal, Government Advocates for
respondents.
Headnote:Police Regulations (M.P.) -- Reg. 16 -- Criminal P.C., 1973 -- Chap.9 -- investigation of criminal case -- handing over to CID -- should be strictly in accordance with the provisions -- cannot be handed over as a matter of course but only in serious crimes which are of special difficulty and in categories of cases mentioned in regulation 16 -- handing over investigation to CID after filing of challan is not permissible.
A complaint under sections 302 and 307, Indian Penal Code has been registered against one Bakhtawar Singh, who is retired Additional Superintendent of Police. Said Bakhtawar Singh met one Shivraj Singh Chauhan, Member of Parliament and said Shivraj Singh Chauhan wrote a letter to the Chief Minister vide Annexure P-5. On the letter, Chief Minister directed that the investigation be conducted by CID. In the complaint it was alleged that investigation for an offence under sections 302 and 307, Indian Penal Code in Crime No. 63/2005 is not carried out properly. In pursuance of this letter, final report was submitted by Devendra Singh Sisodiya that no case is made out against Bakhtawar Singh, Palvinder, Narendra Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Vindar Singh, Harisingh, Gurulal and Jitendra Singh. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that this type of report by holding parallel inquiry or reinvestigation by CID is demoralizing the police force and the alleged accused are released without any trial. He submitted that direction to hold inquiry by CID in contravention of regulation 16 of the Police Regulations deserves to be quashed. Any person who is accused of some crime must prove his innocence before the Court. [Para 2
Held : Normally, it is the investigating agency which is empowered to entrust investigation to any officer and it is also empowered to withdraw investigation from one officer and appoint senior officer for investigation. However, handing over a case for investigation to CID should be strictly in terms of regulation 16 of the M.P. Police Regulations and in terms of provisions of Chapter 9 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Practice of handing over investigation to CID after filing of challan in Court is not permissible. Normally, investigation should not be interfered with unless strong prima facie and cogent reasons are available with the superior officer and investigation should be carried out by the same officer. If the higher authorities are of the opinion that fair investigation is not being carried out, it may examine the matter and if need be, entrust the investigation to the higher officer. However, investigation cannot be handed over to Criminal Investigation Department (CID) as a matter of course or on demand by a person suspected to have committed the crime, commonly known as accused. Accused must co-operate in the investigation and if he feels that investigation is carried out improperly he has remedy to move application before the Court where challan is filed against him.
Regulation 16 relates to serious crime. If provides that the case of special difficulty which baffles the local police, cases of professional or organized crime, and cases of counterfeit coining or note forgery, should be examined by Superintendent of Police and report be sent by him to Deputy Inspector General in charge of that department with reason to handover case to CID. Thus, after examination and report by Superintendent of Police, handing over of case to CID shall be considered by the competent authority. 2001(3) MPLJ 306 relied on. (2001)6 SCC 181, AIR 1997 SC 93, (2004)3 SCC 349, (2004)3 SCC 363, AIR 1980 SC 326, AIR 1963 SC 447 and AIR 1961 SC 1117 followed. [Paras 15, 16 & 17
iqfyl fofu;e ¼e-iz-½ && fofu;e 16 && naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && v/;k; 9 && nkafMd ekeys dk vUos"k.k && lh vkbZ Mh dks lkSaik tkuk && mica/kksa ds vf/kfu;efu‘B vuqlj.k esa gksuk pkfg, && lkekU; vuqØe esa ugha lkSaik tk ldrk vfirq ek= xaHkhj vijk/kksa esa gh tks fd fo‘ks"k dfBukbZ ds gSa rFkk fofu;e 16 esa mfYyf[kr ekeyksa dh dksfV esa vkrs gSa && pkyku Qkby djus ds i‘pkr~ vUos"k.k lh vkbZ Mh dks lkSaik tkuk vuqKs; ugha gSA
Hkkjrh; naM lafgrk dh /kkjk 302 rFkk 307 ds v/khu c[rkoj flag ds fo:) ifjokn jftLVªhd`r fd;k x;k gS tks fd iqfyl dk lsokfuo`Ùk vij v/kh{kd gSA mDr c[rkoj flag f‘kojkt flag pkSgku laln lnL; ls feyk rFkk f‘kojkt flag pkSgku us eq[;ea=h dks i= fy[kk nsf[k, mikca/k ih&5 ml i= ij ls] eq[;ea=h us funsZ‘k fn;k fd vUos"k.k vijk/k vUos"k.k foHkkx ¼lh vkb Mh½ }kjk fd;k tk,A ifjokn esa ;g vfHkdfFkr fd;k x;k fd Hkkjrh; naM lafgrk dh /kkjk 302 rFkk 307 ds v/khu vijk/k dk vijk/k Ø-63@2005 esa vUos"k.k mfpr :i esa ugha gqvkA bl i= ds vuqlj.k esa] nsosUnzflag fllkSfn;k }kjk vafre fjiksVZ izLrqr dh xbZ fd c[rkoj flag] iyfoanj] ujsanz flag] lq[knso flag] foanj flag] gjhflag] xq:yky rFkk ftrsUnz flag ds fo:) dksbZ ekeyk ugha curkA ;kphx.k ds dkmUlsy }kjk fuosnu fd;k x;k fd lh vkb Mh }kjk lekukarj tk¡p vFkok iqu% vUos"k.k fd;k tk dj bl izdkj dh fjiksVZ }kjk iqfyl cy dk mRlkg Hkax gks jgk gS rFkk vfHkdfFkr vfHk;qDr fcuk fopkj.k ds NksM+ fn, x, gSaA mUgksaus fuosnu fd;k fd iqfyl fofu;e ds fu;e 16 ds mYya?ku esa lh vkb Mh }kjk tk¡p dh tkus dk funs‘k vfHk[kafMr fd, tkus ;ksX; gSA fdlh Hkh vijk/k esa vfHk;qDr O;fDr dks viuh funksZf"krk U;k;ky; ds le{k lkfcr djuk gh gksrh gSA ¼iSjk 2
vfHkfu/kkZfjr % lkekU;r%] og vUos"k.k vfHkdj.k gS tks fdlh vf/kdkjh dks vUos"k.k lkSaius ds fy, l‘kDr gS rFkk og ,d vf/kdkjh ls vUos"k.k okil ysus rFkk vUos"k.k ds fy, ofj"B vf/kdkjh fu;qDr djus ds fy, Hkh l‘kDr gSA rFkkfi] ekeyk vUos"k.k ds fy, lh vkb Mh dks lkSaik tkuk vfrfu;efu"Bk :i ls e-iz- iqfyl fofu;e ds fofu;e 16 ds fuca/kuksa ds vuqlkj rFkk naM izfØ;k lafgrk ds v/;k; 9 ds mica/kksa ds fuca/kuksa ds vuqlkj gksuk pkfg,A
U;k;ky; esa pkyku is‘k djus ds i‘pkr~ lh vkb Mh dks vUos"k.k lkSais tkus dh izFkk vuqKs; ugha gSA lkekU;r%] vUos"k.k esa gLr{ksi ugha fd;k tkuk pkfg, tc rd fd ofj"B vf/kdkjh ds ikl izFken`"V~;k iDds rdZiw.kZ dkj.k u gksa rFkk vUos"k.k mlh vf/kdkjh }kjk fd;k tkuk pkfg,A ;fn ofj"B vf/kdkfj;ksa dh jk; gS fd _tq vUos"k.k ugha fd;k tk jgk gS] rc og ekeys dk ijh{k.k dj ldrk gS rFkk ;fn vko‘;d gS rks vUos"k.k ofj"B vf/kdkjh dks lkSai ldrk gSA rFkkfi] vUos"k.k vijk/k vUos"k.k foHkkx ¼lh vkb Mh½ dks lkekU; vuqØe esa vFkok] ftlds }kjk vijk/k dkfjr fd, tkus dk lansg gks] lkekU;r% vfHk;qDr ds :i esa Kkr O;fDr dh ek¡x ij] lkSaik ugha tk ldrkA vfHk;qDr dks vUos"k.k esa lg;ksx djuk pkfg, rFkk ;fn mls yxrk gS vUos"k.k vuqfpr izdkj ls gqvk gS rc ftl U;k;ky; esa mlds fo:) pkyku Qkby gqvk gS mlesa vkosnu djus dk mls mipkj izkIr gSA
fofu;e 16 xaHkhj vijk/k ls lac) gSA mlesa micaf/kr gS fd LFkkuh; iqfyl dks pdjk nsus] fo‘ks"k dfBukbZ ds ekeyksa] O;kolkf;d vFkok laxfBr vijk/k ds ekeyksa] rFkk dwVd`r flDdksa vFkok uksV dwVjpuk ds ekeyksa dk ijh{k.k iqfyl v/kh{kd }kjk fd;k tkuk pkfg, rFkk mlds }kjk ml foHkkx ds Hkkjlk/kd mi&egkfujh{kd dks lh vkb Mh dks ekeyk lkSaius ds dkj.k lfgr fjiksVZ Hksth tkuk pkfg,A vr%] ijh{k.k rFkk iqfyl v/kh{kd }kjk fjiksVZ ds i‘pkr~] lh vkb Mh dks ekeyk lkSais tkus ij l{ke izkf/kdkjh }kjk fopkj fd;k tk,xkA 2001¼3½ ,e ih ,y ts 306 voyafcrA ¼2001½6 ,l lh lh 181] , vkb vkj 1997 ,l lh 93] ¼2004½3 ,l lh lh 349] ¼2004½3 ,l lh lh 363] , vkb vkj 1980 ,l lh 326] , vkb vkj 1963 ,l lh 447 rFkk , vkb vkj 1961 ¼,l lh½ 1117 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 15] 16 ,oa 17
Jha, J. -
1. This petition is filed by the petitioners in public interest challenging the action of the respondents whereby reinvestigation is handed over to CID in violation of Chapter 12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Regulation 16 of the M.P. Police Regulations.
2. Question raised by the petitioners is that on intervention of politicians or people having influence, investigation in criminal case is hampered by conducting parallel investigation or fresh investigation by the police in criminal cases in violation of the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure and Police Regulations. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that order was passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 446/05 that in case respondent No.5 Ramlakhan Dhakad is absconding and warrant of arrest has been issued against him and he is wanted in any criminal case, Superintendent of Police, Morena shall ensure action in the matter and send compliance report to the Registry of this Court. After the orders of this Court, names of Ramlakhan and Pramod Dhakad were deleted from the challan papers which is apparent from Annexure P-2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that a complaint under sections 302 and 307, Indian Penal Code has been registered against one Bakhtawar Singh, who is retired Additional Superintendent of Police. Said Bakhtawar Singh met one Shivraj Singh Chauhan, Member of Parliament and said Shivraj Singh Chauhan wrote a letter to the Chief Minister vide Annexure P-5. On the letter, Chief Minister directed that the investigation be conducted by CID. In the complaint it was alleged that investigation for an offence under sections 302 and 307 Indian Penal Code in Crime No. 63/2005 is not carried out properly. In pursuance of this letter, final report was submitted by Devendra Singh Sisodiya that no case is made out against Bakhtawar Singh, Palvinder, Narendra Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Vindar Singh, Harisingh, Gurulal and Jitendra Singh. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that this type of report by holding parallel inquiry or reinvestigation by CID is demoralizing the police force and the alleged accused are released without any trial. He submitted that direction to hold inquiry by CID in contravention of Regulation 16 of the Police Regulations deserves to be quashed. Any person who is accused of some crime must prove his innocence before the Court. Similarly, Ramlakhan has also submitted an application to the Superintendent of Police, Morena, praying therein that investigation be conducted by some senior police officer. Superintendent of Police, Morena directed SDO(P), Joura, to conduct inquiry. SDO(P) Morena, conducted the inquiry and found that Ramlakhan Dhakad and Pramod Dhakad were not involved in the crime. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that on account of directions of parallel inquiry or inquiry by some superior officer, wrong message is going to the public that if somebody is in a position to wield influence, he can shun the investigation against him by adopting aforesaid method.
3. Counsel for the State submitted that police has statutory powers to investigate the offence which should be exercised constitutionally as per the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure and there should not be abuse of powers. Investigation conducted by CID or higher police officer is neither illegal nor arbitrary and it is permissible. It is also contended by the State that practice of false implication of accused cannot be ruled out.
4. Question involved in the case is whether on the complaint of accused to the Chief Minister or Member of Parliament or MLA, whether fresh investigation by other investigating agency or by some higher authority can be ordered or whether fresh investigation can be permitted or fresh FIR can he lodged.
5. Regulation 16 of the M.P. Police Regulations is reproduced below:
"16. Serious Crime. -- The co-ordination of the work of the Criminal Investigation Department with that of the District police is entirely
