Case Law
2025-12-06
Subject: Criminal Law - Police Investigation and Jurisdiction
In a significant ruling on police jurisdictional limits, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has set aside a lower court's directive to involve a specialized police unit in investigating a custodial death case. The decision underscores the boundaries of investigative powers under recent government notifications, emphasizing that magistrates must respect the specific remits of police agencies.
The petition, CRM(M) No. 354/2022, was filed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Kashmir (formerly part of the Crime Branch), represented by advocate Ms. Maha Majid. The respondents included Shafiqua Muneer and another unnamed party, with no representation appearing on their behalf.
The dispute arose from a complaint by respondent No. 1 (Shafiqua Muneer), alleging that her son was tortured to death in custody by police officials at Police Station Nowgam. On July 15, 2022, the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (City Judge), Srinagar, ordered the Station House Officer of Police Station Crime Branch, Srinagar, to register an FIR against respondent No. 2 and unknown officials, and conduct the investigation through an efficient officer.
The petitioner challenged the order solely on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that the Economic Offences Wing lacks authority to probe such cases. Counsel highlighted that Notification S.O 232 dated May 9, 2022, designates the Economic Offences Wing as a police station with powers vested in its Superintendent but limits its scope to specific economic offences listed in the annexure. Custodial torture and killing do not feature in this list, placing the matter outside the wing's purview.
No counter-arguments were presented, as respondents did not appear. The court, after hearing the petitioner's side and reviewing the record, focused on the notification's explicit delimitations.
The court drew on the precedent set by a coordinate bench in S. Balbir Singh vs. Ishar Das , 2010(3) JKJ [HC] 180. That case examined similar powers under the now-superseded SRO 202 of 1999, ruling that magistrates can only direct the Crime Branch (or its successor) to investigate if the offence falls within its jurisdictional scope. Otherwise, directions must go to the relevant jurisdictional police station.
Justice Sanjay Dhar applied this principle, noting that Section 482 of the Cr.P.C allows inherent powers to prevent abuse of process, but only within the framework of statutory jurisdictions like S.O 232. The judgment clarified that expanding investigative mandates beyond notified offences undermines the specialized structure of law enforcement agencies.
Pivotal excerpt from the ruling: "Such type of offence does not find mention in the list of offences mentioned in Annexure to S.O 232 dated 09.05.2022. Therefore, the learned trial Magistrate was not empowered to direct Economic Offences Wing, Srinagar to register an FIR and investigate the case, as the same is beyond the jurisdiction of aforesaid Investigating Agency."
On December 3, 2025, Justice Sanjay Dhar allowed the petition, quashing the magistrate's July 15, 2022, order as unsustainable in law. The case was remanded to the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (City Judge), Srinagar, with directions to pass fresh orders on Shafiqua Muneer's complaint in accordance with the law—likely routing the investigation to the appropriate jurisdictional police station, such as Nowgam.
This ruling reinforces the importance of adhering to specialized police jurisdictions, potentially affecting how complaints of custodial misconduct are handled in Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. It serves as a reminder to lower courts to verify agency remits before issuing investigative directives, ensuring efficient and lawful probes into serious allegations like custodial deaths. Legal experts anticipate it may influence future cases involving inter-agency investigations, promoting clarity in a complex policing landscape.
#CriminalJurisdiction #PoliceInvestigation #JKHighCourt
Thane Court Rejects Application to Dismiss Defamation Suit Against Digvijaya Singh Over RSS Remarks: Order VII Rule 11 CPC
06 Feb 2026
Ministry Revises Fees for Central Government Counsel Effective 2026
06 Feb 2026
Temporary Re-Employment Not Entitling Ex-Serviceman to Civil Pension: Punjab & Haryana HC
06 Feb 2026
High Courts Confirm Only 10% of Death Sentences Since 2016
06 Feb 2026
Finality in IPS Cadre Allocation Cannot Be Reopened After Decades: Supreme Court
06 Feb 2026
Patna HC Quashes Cognizance Against Minister Sans Assault Allegations
06 Feb 2026
Supreme Court Directs Trial Courts to Inform Accused of Legal Aid Rights Before Witness Examination
07 Feb 2026
Law Ministry Reveals 73% Upper Caste Judges Since 2021
07 Feb 2026
Dwivedi: British Geopolitics Created Pakistan, Not Jinnah
07 Feb 2026
Transfer of police investigation must adhere to jurisdictional authority set by a Magistrate, as per Sections 156 and 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The court affirmed that magistrates cannot order further investigations post-cognizance without evidence of malafide, upholding the legitimacy of the charge sheet filed under Section 498A.
Reinvestigation of a case requires prior court permission, while further investigation does not, as established under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Territorial jurisdiction of Court – Although for trial of a case instituted on a police report no provision parallel to Section 201 of Cr.P.C. has been prescribed, there is no difficulty in borrowing....
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.