SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 8992

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MR. TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
ANU DUGGAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE & ORS – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Senior Advocate, Mr. Nitin Mehta, Ms. Sowjanya Shankaran, Mr. Siddharth Satija, Mr. Arpit Rawat, Mr. Chirag Singh, Ms. Anuka Bachawat, Mr. Akash Sachan and Ms. Yukta
For the Respondents: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC (Crl.), Mr. Kshitiz Garg, Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Manan Wadhwa, Mr. Nitish Dhawan, Ms. Anubha Bhardwaj, SPP, Ms. Muskan Narang and Mr. Vijay Misra

Judgement Key Points

How to determine whether a court should transfer an investigation from local police to a specialized agency like the CBI?

What is the standard for exercising the extraordinary power under Article 226 to direct CBI investigation in cases of alleged biased or deficient police investigation?

What are the circumstances under which the court may order reinvestigation or transfer of investigation to ensure a fair and complete investigation?


Table of Content
1. investigation initiated under suspicious circumstances. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5)
2. failure of initial investigations and discrepancies. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. arguments regarding necessity for cbi investigation. (Para 12 , 15 , 16)
4. importance of thorough and unbiased investigation. (Para 18 , 19)
5. court's discretion in transferring investigation for justice. (Para 23 , 24 , 33)
6. conclusion directing cbi investigation is justified. (Para 35 , 40)

JUDGMENT

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.

1. Present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , 1950, seeking transfer of investigation in F.I.R. No.45/2018 dated 22.02.2018 registered under Section 302 , Indian Penal Code , 1860, from Delhi Police to respondent no.4/Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for conducting a fresh/de novo investigation.

2. Petitioner is the mother of Mr. Arnav Duggal, a 23 year old hotel management graduate working as Manager, ITC Grand Bharat at the time, who died under mysterious and suspicious circumstances on 13.06.2017, at Flat No.441, Shakuntalam Apartments, Sector 10, Dwarka, Delhi i.e. the residential house of Ms. Megha Tiwary, daughter of Mr. R.K. Tiwary.

3.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top