Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: Section 156 (3), Leading Caselaw: Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P.

-

 Facts:

The son of the appellant was a Major in the Indian Army. His dead body was found on 23.8.2003 at Mathura Railway Station. The G.R.P, Mathura investigated the matter and gave a detailed report on 29.8.2003 stating that the death was due suicide. The claim for suicide was upheld by the domestic servant and gang-man, who said the deceased was never happy. But the appellant alleged the case was of murder because the deceased got to know about corruption in Army, hence, he was killed. The appellant made request to Army Court to look into the matter but they declared it to suicide. Hence, the appeal is filed to order Central Bureau of Investigation (in short “CBI”) to investigate the matter. 

Criminal Law & Court Representation | Paul Gowran Solicitors in Jesmond


Issue:

Whether the CBI enquiry can be initiated in the present case?

Ratio Decidendi:

The court stated that CBI enquiry cannot be conducted by stating, CBI v. Rajesh Gandhi [(1996) 11 SCC 253] that no one can insist that an offence be investigated by a particular agency. An aggrieved person can only claim that the offence he alleges be investigated properly, but he has no right to claim that it be investigated by any particular agency of his choice. No doubt the Magistrate cannot order investigation by the CBI vide CBI v. State of Rajasthan, but this Court or the High Court has power under Article 136 or Article 226 to order investigation by the CBI. That, however should be done only in some rare and exceptional case, otherwise, the CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and would find it impossible to properly investigate all of them. In the present case, we are of the opinion that the material on record does not disclose a prima facie case calling for an investigation by the CBI. The mere allegation of the appellant that his son was murdered because he had discovered some corruption cannot, in our opinion, justify a CBI inquiry, particularly when inquiries were held by the Army authorities as well as by the G.R.P. at Mathura, which revealed that it was a case of suicide.

For the investigation to be proper, the court reiterated the powers of the magistrate under section 156 (3) by applying Doctrine of Implied powers:

1.     if an FIR has been registered and even if the police has made the investigation, or is actually making the investigation, which the aggrieved person feels is not proper, such a person can approach the Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., and if the Magistrate is satisfied, he can order a proper investigation and take other suitable steps and pass such order orders as he thinks necessary for ensuring a proper investigation.

2.     Magistrate perform checks on police if they are performing their duty of not under section 156 (3) 

3.     The power in the Magistrate to order further investigation under Section 156(3) is an independent power, and does not affect the power of the investigating officer to further investigate the case even after submission of his report vide Section 173(8). Hence the Magistrate can order re-opening of the investigation even after the police submits the final report, vide State of Bihar v. J.A.C. Saldanha

 

In our opinion Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation, and it includes the power to order registration of an F.I.R. and of ordering a proper investigation if the Magistrate is satisfied that a proper investigation has not been done, or is not being done by the police. Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., though briefly worded, in our opinion, is very wide and it will include all such incidental powers as are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation.

 

Moreover, the court stated, If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police station his first remedy is to approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. or other police officer referred to in Section 36 Cr.P.C. If despite approaching the Superintendent of Police or the officer referred to in Section 36 his grievance still persists, then he can approach a Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. instead of rushing to the High Court by way of a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Moreover, he has a further remedy of filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C.

 

Judgement:

The appeal is dismissed. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: Section 319, Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence (Leading Case law: Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab )

-
Image
Facts: On June 24, 2004, Hardeep Singh was ploughing the land. The accused persons went there with deadly weapons and caused injuries to Hardeep Singh as well as other prosecution witnesses. First Information Report (FIR) was lodged against many of the accused for commission of offences punishable under Sections 307, 326, 336 and 427 read with Sections 120B, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) as also for offences punishable under Sections 25, 27, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act, 1959. Accused were arrested. Vijay Preet Singh (respondent No. 2) was one of them but the father of Vijay Singh interfered in investigation. Hence, he was discharged before framing of the charges. Moreover, Jagtar Singh (respondent No.3) whose name was not mentioned in the FIR, but as per witnesses also involved. The appeal is brought before the constitutional bench of Supreme Court because the division bench came onto differing opinion as to the additions of the respondent 2 and 3 to the case using sec...
Read more

Constitutionalism- Explained

-
Image
In simple words, Constitutionalism is a doctrine that a government’s authority is determined by a body of laws or constitution. More generally constitutionalism refers to efforts to prevent arbitrary government.   [1]    Constitutionalism is based on the idea of political theories of John Locke and the founders of the American republic, that government can and should be legally limited in its powers, and that its authority or legitimacy depends on its observing these limitations. The central point of Constitutionalism is a “Limited Government”. Constitutionalism recognises the need for a government but at the same time also insists upon restraining its (government’s) power.  [2]   Epitome of Constitutionalism is Magna Carta issued in 1215 that limited the power of England’s King John. Constitutionalism places limits upon the arbitrary    powers of the three government power: legislative power (making new laws), executive power (implementing laws) and j...
Read more

Section 8, Hindu adoption and maintenance Act,1956: Capacity of a female Hindu to take in Adoption (Brijendra Singh v. State of M.P.)

-
Image
Facts: Sometime in 1948, Mishri Bai, a crippled lady was married to Padam Singh and the marriage was solemnized according to customs of village, it was imperative for a virgin girl to get married. Evidence on record shows that Padam Singh had left Mishri Bai soon after the marriage and since then she was living with her parents. Seeing her plight, her parents had given her a piece of land measuring 32 acres out of their agricultural holdings for her maintenance. In 1970, Mishri Bai claims to have adopted appellant Brajendra Singh. Padma Singh died in the year 1974. The Sub-Divisional Officer, served a notice on Mishri Bai under indicating that her holding of agricultural land was more than the prescribed limit. Mishri Bai filed a reply and contended that Brajendra Singh is her adopted son and both of them constituted a Joint family and therefore are entitled to retain 54 acres of land.  The Sub Divisional officer disbelieved the claim of adoption on the ground that in the entr...
Read more