Back
D.A.DESAI, O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, R.S.SARKARIA
State Of Bihar: R. P. Singh – Appellant
Versus
J. A. C. Saldanha – Respondent
Key Points: - The Court held that general superintendence over the police includes the power to direct further investigation when warranted, and is not limited by Section 173(8) or other provisions, provided circumstances justify it (!) (!) (!) . - It was found that the State Government, via the Chief Secretary and Chief Minister, could direct the Inspector-General, Vigilance, to take over or direct further investigation, and such action is not outside the scope of Section 3 of the Indian Police Act, given the general power of superintendence over the entire state police (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The High Court’s interference under Article 226 to preclude further investigation in the midst of ongoing investigation and before a final order by the magistrate was considered improper and set aside; the judiciary’s role begins when cognizance is taken or when directed by statute, and not to prematurely direct conclusions during ongoing investigations (context of Khwaja Nazir Ahmad cited) (!) (!) (!) .
JUDGMENT
D. A. DESAI, J.:—Reverence and anxiety to the same degree, if not more, to shoot at sight even a remote intrusion into the field preserved for judiciary must inform the judicial approach whenever assistance of the judicial machinery is sought for an unwarranted encroachment into the field of activity reserved for the other branch of Government, more so, when extraordinary power conferred on the High Court to issue prerogative writ in aid of justice is invoked to thwart a possible detection of a suspected offence. How dangerous it is to rush in where one should be wary to tread is amply demonstrated by the facts revealed in these two appeals.
2. Factual matrix will highlight the situation. Though the point canvassed centres round the limit of jurisdiction to interfere with the investigation of an offence registered at a police station, to pin-point the contention, relevant facts may be stated with circumspection, as the case is sub judice because any overt or covert expression of opinion on the facts in controversy awaiting adjudication may be censured as judicial impropriety.
3. Tata Iron Steel Co. Ltd., (TISCO for short), has a railway siding at Adityapur in Tatanagar. A Fe
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
