2009 (4) TMI 947

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... if he goes to the Nandhi Departmental Stores. This information received by P.W.4 was conveyed to his superior P.W.5, who was the Inspector of Police, Narcotic Intelligence Bureau during the relevant period. The said information given in writing is Ex.P.6. On the basis of the said information, P.W.5 met P.W.6 and appraised him of the said fact. Thereafter, PWs 4, 5 and 6 went to the said departmental store and arrested the accused. The accused was found in possession of a bag which contained the narcotic substance. The accused was informed of his right under section 50 of the Act. Thereafter, the bag was searched and the officers found 5 Kgs. of opium in the said bag. After taking 10 grams of opium for sample, the remaining opium was als....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rough Inspector of Police, NIB, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, preferred a special leave petition under Article 136 of the Constitution before this Court. This Court granted leave on 29.8.2002. The short question which falls for consideration of this Court is whether P.W.6 who registered the crime could have investigated the case or an independent officer ought to have investigated the case. The learned counsel appearing for the accused submitted that the controversy involved in this case is no longer res integra. In Megna Singh v. State of Haryana (1996) 11 SCC 709, this Court has taken a categorical view that the officer who arrested the accused should not have proceeded with the investigation of the case. The relevant paragraph reads as unde....