Page 1

JUDGMENT

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1883 OF 2013

(@SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 7066 OF 2009)

STATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

… APPELLANTS

VERSUS

LALU SINGH

…RESPONDENT

J U D G M E N T

CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, J.

While dismissing the Writ Petition, the High

Court has made observations which have far reaching

consequences and accordingly the State of Bihar,

aggrieved by the same has preferred this Special

Leave Petition. The observations made read as

follows:

“I have no doubt in taking this view

that under Section 36 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, the higher police

officials have got same powers as

available to the officer-in-charge of

a police station under them but the

Page 2

JUDGMENT

power is available only with respect

to supervising the investigation or

participating into the investigation

to some extent but under section

173(2) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, the final view over the

investigation of a case with regard

to filing charge sheet or final form

has to be taken by the concerned

officer-in-charge only and he only

has the authority to file the charge

sheet in the case”

While doing so, however, the High Court has not

quashed the report submitted by the Inspector of the

Criminal Investigation Department of the State

Government.

It is the aforesaid observation, which is the

subject matter of this special leave petition.

Leave granted.

Facts lie in a narrow compass:

On the basis of an oral statement made by one

Shail Kumari Devi before the officer-in-charge of

Marhaura Police Station, Marhaura, P.S. Case No. 148

of 2004 was registered under Section 302/34 of the

Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

2

Page 3

JUDGMENT

The officer-in-charge of the Police Station took up

the investigation, but before he could complete the

same, and submit report in terms of Section 173 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred

to as the “Code”), the Director General of Police

entrusted the investigation to the Criminal

Investigation Department, (hereinafter referred to as

“C.I.D.”) and the task for conducting the

investigation was assigned to an Inspector. The

Inspector of C.I.D. conducted the investigation and

submitted the charge-sheet against the accused

persons. On consideration of the charge-sheet and

the materials collected during the course of

investigation, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran

took cognizance of the offence and directed for

issuance of process. One of the accused, namely Lalu

Singh, aggrieved by the same, preferred writ petition

before the High Court for quashing the prosecution,

inter alia, on the ground that under Section 173(2)

of the Code only an officer in-charge of a Police

station has the authority to do that and, therefore,

3

Page 4

JUDGMENT

the charge-sheet submitted by the Inspector, C.I.D.

is fit to be quashed.

The High Court considered the aforesaid

submission and though it declined to quash the

charge-sheet, it made the observation quoted above

and held that it is the officer-in-charge only who

can file the charge-sheet.

We have heard Mr. Manish Kumar, learned Counsel

for the appellants and Mr. Nagendra Rai, learned

Senior Counsel for the respondent.

Mr. Kumar contends that the Inspector of C.I.D.

possesses the power to submit report under Section

173(2) of the Code and the observation made by the

High Court is erroneous. Mr. Rai, however, submits

that in the facts of the present case, the High court

was justified in making the observations as quoted

above.

In view of the rival submissions, we deem it

expedient to analyse the scheme of the Code and the

provisions of the Bihar Police Manual. Section 173

4

Page 5

JUDGMENT

of the C