2023 (2) TMI 1193 - SC - Indian Laws

Seeking transfer of the investigation to Central Bureau of Investigation or to any other agency to investigate/re-investigate the FIR, registered at Vartak Nagar Police Station, Thane - rejection to order further investigation/re-investigation/de novo investigation - refusal mainly on the ground that once the chargesheet is filed after investigation and the charges are framed, the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to order further investigation/re-investigation/de novo investigation. HELD THAT - In the case of HIMANSHU KUMAR AND ORS. VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ORS. 2022 (7) TMI 1469 - SUPREME COURT , this Court had occasion to consider the power of the Court to transfer investigation to any other independent agency. After taking into consideration the catena of judgments on the point, it is reiterated that investigation may be transferred to the CBI only in rare and exceptional cases . Bearing in mind the position of law and, in the facts, and circumstances of the case, it is opined that the High Court has not committed any error in refusing to transfer the investigation to CBI. Even the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant has not vehemently pressed such a prayer - the view taken by the High Court insofar as refusing to transfer the investigation to CBI is concerned completely agreed upon. Power of the Constitutional Courts to order further investigation/re-investigation/de novo investigation even after the chargesheet is filed and charges are framed - HELD THAT - Applying the law laid down by this Court in the case of DHARAM PAL VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. 2016 (1) TMI 1460 - SUPREME COURT and BHARATI TAMANG VERSUS UOI. ORS. 2013 (10) TMI 1297 - SUPREME COURT and to do the complete justice and in furtherance of fair investigation and fair trial, the constitutional courts may order further investigation/re-investigation/de novo investigation even after the charge sheet is filed and the charges are framed. If the submission on behalf of the Accused and even as observed by the High Court that once the chargesheet is filed and the charges are framed, there may not be any order for further investigation/re-investigation/de novo investigation is accepted, in that case, the Accused may see to it that the charges are framed to avoid any fair investigation/fair trial. It would lead to travesty of justice. It is required to be noted that in the present case, the allegations in the FIR, right from very beginning, were against the Accused No. 13, who at the relevant time was the sitting Cabinet Minister occupying the high position. Even at the relevant time, when the State Police investigated the FIR bearing No. 120 of 2020, in the first chargesheet and the second chargesheet did not name the Accused No. 13. Even the investigation was also conducted in a perfunctory manner. The real investigation started only after the intervention of the High Court and after passing various orders in the present proceedings by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR were very serious including the misuse of powers by the sitting Cabinet Minister and of abducting, kidnapping and beating the complainant - there was no proper investigation by the State investigating agency at the relevant time and even the material evidences were also not collected. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court refusing to transfer the investigation of the FIR No. 120 of 2020 to CBI is hereby confirmed. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court refusing to order further investigation/re-investigation is hereby quashed and set aside - Petition allowed in part.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Transfer of investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
2. Further investigation/re-investigation/de novo investigation of FIR Nos. 119 of 2020 and 120 of 2020.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Transfer of Investigation to the CBI:
The appellant, a civil engineer, sought the transfer of the investigation of FIR Nos. 119 of 2020 and 120 of 2020 to the CBI, alleging bias and sham investigation by the State police due to the involvement of an influential Minister. The High Court dismissed this request, stating that the investigation had been conducted from all angles, chargesheets had been filed, and charges framed, thus commencing the trial. The Supreme Court, referencing past judgments, reiterated that transferring investigations to the CBI should be done sparingly and only in rare and exceptional cases where credibility and public confidence in the investigation are at stake. The Court agreed with the High Court's decision to not transfer the investigation to the CBI, as the appellant's counsel did not press this prayer vehemently.

2. Further Investigation/Re-investigation/De Novo Investigation:
The appellant argued that the investigation by the State police was conducted in a sham and casual manner, with significant lapses such as not initially naming the Minister in the chargesheet and not collecting crucial evidence like CDRs and CCTV footage. The appellant cited precedents where the Constitutional Courts have the power to order further or re-investigation even after charges are framed to ensure a fair and just investigation. The State, in its counter affidavit, admitted lapses in the investigation and the necessity for further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The respondents opposed the appeal, arguing that since the investigation was concluded, chargesheets filed, and charges framed, further investigation was impermissible. They also contended that the allegations of grievous injuries and other lapses were not supported by records or documents and that the High Court had noted the injuries were simple in nature.

The Supreme Court examined the principles from previous judgments, emphasizing that Constitutional Courts can order further investigation to ensure a fair trial. The Court noted that the initial investigation was perfunctory, and significant steps were taken only after High Court intervention. The Court observed that the allegations against the Minister were serious, and the investigation had not been thorough initially. The Supreme Court concluded that further investigation was warranted to ensure a fair trial, setting aside the High Court's order that denied further investigation.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court confirmed the High Court's decision not to transfer the investigation to the CBI but quashed the High Court's refusal to order further investigation. The State investigating agency was directed to carry out further investigation into FIR No. 120 of 2020 and complete it within three months. The supplementary report should be submitted to the Trial Court for consideration in accordance with the law. The appeal was partly allowed to this extent.