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

2011 Supreme(SC) 845

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.V. RAVEENDRAN & A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.
State of Punjab -Petitioner
Vs.
Central Bureau of Investigation -Respondents & Ors.
Criminal Appeal No. 1709 of 2011
[Arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 7924 of 2008]
Decided On : 2.9.2011

Headnote:Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973–Sections 173(8) and 482–Provisions of Cr.P.C. do not limit or affect inherent powers of High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to secure ends of justice–Section 173(8) cannot limit or affect inherent powers of High Court to pass order under Section 482 for fresh investigation or re-investigation if High Court is satisfied that such fresh investigation or re-investigation is necessary to secure ends of justice. (Paras 14 to 19)

       (2009) 6 SCC 332; (2010)2 SCC 571–Relied.

       

JUDGMENT

A.K. PATNAIK, J.:–This petition under Article 136 of the Constitution has been filed by the State of Punjab praying for special leave to appeal against the order dated 11.12.2007 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 51620 of 2007 (for short “the impugned order”).

2. The facts very briefly are that on 18.4.2007 respondent no.3 lodged FIR No. 82 at Police Station City-I, Moga against Simran Kaur @ Indu and her husband Ajay Kumar alleging offences under Sections 366, 376, 406, 420, 506, 344 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘the IPC’). Pursuant to the FIR, Simran Kaur and Ajay Kumar were arrested on 19.4.2007, but Ajay Kumar managed to escape from the custody of police and FIR No. 83, Police Station City-I, Moga dated 19.4.2007 under Section 224 of the IPC was registered against him. In course of investigation of the case, respondent no.3 made a statement before the police under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Cr.P.C.’) on 23.04.2007 naming 14 other persons who had sex with her against her will and some of these persons were arrested by Sub-Inspector Raman Kumar. The statement of respondent no.3 was recorded on 25.4.2007 under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moga. On 8.5.2007, the investigation of the case was entrusted to Inspector Amarjit Singh, S.H.O. PS City-I, Moga. Some of the persons named by respondent no.3 in her statements were found to be innocent and were released. After completing the investigation, Inspector Amarjit Singh submitted a charge sheet on 1.6.2007 in Court under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C naming Simran Kaur @ Indu, Ajay Kumar, Vimal Kumar, Subhash Chander, Ramesh Kumar, Randhir Singh, Iqbal Singh, Bharat Bhushan and Inderjit Singh as accused persons.

3. On 4.6.2007 FIR No. 160 was registered under Sections 342, 323 and 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC at PS Baghapuran against several accused persons. One of the accused persons Ranjit Singh, however, made a complaint to the Additional Director General of Police (Law and Order) that he has been falsely implicated by Inspector Amarjit Singh in connivance with Manjeet Kaur because he had recorded a conversation by Inspector Amarjit Singh with him in the mobile that he would be arrested if he did not pay a certain amount to him and a compact disc containing the recorded conversation was prepared and attached with the complaint. Investigation into this case was entrusted to Inspector Bhupinder Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bhaga Pura, District Moga. On completion of the enquiry it was found that the allegations against the accused persons were false. Accordingly, on 24.10.2007 FIR No. 198 was registered at PS City –I, Moga under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Sections 384, 211 and 120-B of the IPC against Inspector Amarjit Singh and Manjeet Kaur and respondent no.3 and Inspector Amarjit Singh were arrested. During investigation it also came to light that Sub-Inspector Raman Singh, the then S.H.O., PS Badhnikalan was helping Manjeet Kaur and respondent no.3 and that Sub-Inspector Raman Singh had accepted illegal gratification. Accordingly, offences under Sections 195, 201, 202, 218, 219, 221, 465, 468 and 471 of the IPC were added in the case registered as FIR no. 198 of 2007 and Sub-Inspector Raman Singh was also named as an accused alongwith Inspector Amarjit Singh. Sub-Inspector Raman Kumar was also dismissed from service by the Senior Superintendent of Police.

4. On 11.11.2007, Manjeet Kaur and respondent no.3 were arrested and during interrogation respondent no.3 alleged that on 4.11.2007, Sub-Inspector Raman Kumar took her and Bhupinder Kumar @ Rocky Sharma to a place at Karnal in Haryana, where Bhupinder Kumar @ Rocky Sharma raped her during the night of 4/5.11.2007. On 13.11.2007, a news item was published in the Hindustan Times headlined ‘Moga Sex Scandal’ and two ladies




























































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 Back to top