Thursday, Jun 28, 2007 The Hindu
“State agencies can effectively handle criminal cases"
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has asked High Courts not to order an inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation in routine criminal cases as State agencies can effectively probe such matters.
“In each State, a mechanism has been created under the Constitution for effective investigation of criminal cases, and they could not be handed over to the CBI in a routine manner unless there is a compelling reason,” said a Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and B.P. Singh.
A CBI inquiry could not be ordered by a judicial officer of subordinate courts. And even the High Courts could not order it at the instance of petitioners.
“Of course, where it is shown that the investigating agency in a State is not doing proper investigation and/or that there is reason to believe that there is laxity in the investigation, a direction may be given to the CBI to investigate the matter in appropriate cases.”
Magisterial power
On the powers of subordinate court judges, the Bench said: “Magisterial power cannot be stretched under Section 156 (3) Cr.PC beyond directing the officer in-charge of a police station to conduct the investigation, and no such direction can be given to the CBI.”
The Bench was allowing a CBI appeal against an order of the Gujarat High Court, which criticised the agency for approaching it directly in a case where a CBI inquiry was ordered by a Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM). The High Court said the CBI should have first gone to the sessions court against the CJM’s order. Though it quashed the CJM’s order for the CBI inquiry, the High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 1,000 on the agency for approaching it directly.
Judgment quashed
Quashing the impugned judgment, the Bench said, “The High Court was not right in its approach.” In the instant case, the first information report was already registered and in that sense Section 156 (3) Cr.PC had no application. It was a routine case of theft and no complexity was involved. There was no bar on the High Court entertaining the petition from the CBI.
“The criticism levelled against the CBI and its officers and the cost imposed do not have legal sanction.”
http://www.hindu.com/2007/06/28/stories/2007062860471500.htm
For any query:-
09896868668
deepakmiglani@hotmail.com
“State agencies can effectively handle criminal cases"
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has asked High Courts not to order an inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation in routine criminal cases as State agencies can effectively probe such matters.
“In each State, a mechanism has been created under the Constitution for effective investigation of criminal cases, and they could not be handed over to the CBI in a routine manner unless there is a compelling reason,” said a Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and B.P. Singh.
A CBI inquiry could not be ordered by a judicial officer of subordinate courts. And even the High Courts could not order it at the instance of petitioners.
“Of course, where it is shown that the investigating agency in a State is not doing proper investigation and/or that there is reason to believe that there is laxity in the investigation, a direction may be given to the CBI to investigate the matter in appropriate cases.”
Magisterial power
On the powers of subordinate court judges, the Bench said: “Magisterial power cannot be stretched under Section 156 (3) Cr.PC beyond directing the officer in-charge of a police station to conduct the investigation, and no such direction can be given to the CBI.”
The Bench was allowing a CBI appeal against an order of the Gujarat High Court, which criticised the agency for approaching it directly in a case where a CBI inquiry was ordered by a Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM). The High Court said the CBI should have first gone to the sessions court against the CJM’s order. Though it quashed the CJM’s order for the CBI inquiry, the High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 1,000 on the agency for approaching it directly.
Judgment quashed
Quashing the impugned judgment, the Bench said, “The High Court was not right in its approach.” In the instant case, the first information report was already registered and in that sense Section 156 (3) Cr.PC had no application. It was a routine case of theft and no complexity was involved. There was no bar on the High Court entertaining the petition from the CBI.
“The criticism levelled against the CBI and its officers and the cost imposed do not have legal sanction.”
http://www.hindu.com/2007/06/28/stories/2007062860471500.htm
For any query:-
09896868668
deepakmiglani@hotmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment