2011 (7) TMI 1297 - HC - Indian Laws

Court Upholds Mumbai Police Investigation, Denies CBI Transfer; Stresses Exceptional Circumstances

The court dismissed the petitions seeking the transfer of the investigation to the CBI, emphasizing the need for exceptional circumstances to exercise ... - Issues Involved:1. Transfer of investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).2. Alleged nexus between Mumbai Police and the underworld.3. Competence and integrity of the Mumbai Police in handling the investigation.4. Alleged leaks and contradictory statements by the Mumbai Police to the Press.5. Application of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA).Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Transfer of Investigation to CBI:The primary prayer in the writ petitions was to transfer the investigation of the murder of J. Dey to the CBI. Petitioners argued that the Mumbai Police were not conducting an impartial and honest investigation due to alleged connections with the underworld. The court examined relevant judgments, including the Constitution Bench judgment in Committee For Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal, which emphasized that the High Court has the power to direct CBI to investigate a cognizable offense in exceptional situations. The court concluded that the power to transfer investigations to CBI should be exercised sparingly, cautiously, and only in exceptional circumstances.2. Alleged Nexus Between Mumbai Police and the Underworld:Petitioners alleged that J. Dey was silenced due to his investigative journalism exposing the nexus between Mumbai Police and the underworld. However, the court found these allegations to be extremely general and lacking in material particulars. The court noted that no concrete evidence was provided to establish this nexus. The Vohra Committee Report, which was cited, contained general conclusions about organized crime but did not provide specific evidence relevant to this case.3. Competence and Integrity of the Mumbai Police:The court reviewed the progress of the investigation, noting that eight persons had been arrested and MCOCA had been applied to the accused. The court found that the investigation was not lackadaisical or perfunctory. It was noted that one of the petitioners, Mr. Tirodkar, expressed confidence in the Commissioner of Police and the Joint Commissioner of Police, though he feared potential pressure on them. The court concluded that there was no evidence of the Mumbai Police working under any undue pressure.4. Alleged Leaks and Contradictory Statements by the Mumbai Police to the Press:Petitioners claimed that the Mumbai Police were leaking details of the investigation and issuing contradictory statements, causing embarrassment to J. Dey's family. The Advocate General denied these allegations, stating that authorized representatives issued press statements and any incorrect reporting was not the police's responsibility. The court did not express an opinion on this disputed factual aspect but emphasized the need for the police to regulate the amount and nature of information disclosed to the Press to avoid adverse effects on the investigation and prosecution.5. Application of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA):Mr. Tirodkar, one of the petitioners, argued for the application of MCOCA to the accused. The Advocate General confirmed that MCOCA had been applied. The court acknowledged this application and noted that it demonstrated the seriousness with which the Mumbai Police were handling the investigation.Conclusion:The court dismissed the petitions, concluding that the petitioners failed to make out a case for transferring the investigation to CBI. The court emphasized that the extraordinary power to transfer investigations should be used sparingly and only in exceptional cases. The court also touched upon the issue of police disclosures to the Press, suggesting that the Mumbai Police should regulate such disclosures to ensure they do not hamper investigations or prosecution.