TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (9) TMI 1035
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt `the Code'). This Court, on more than one occasion, decried uncalled for interference by the Courts into domain of investigation of crimes by police in discharge of their statutory functions. The principle has been succinctly stated way back in Emperor V. Khwaja Nazir Ahmad [AIR 1945 PC 18] and the same has been repeatedly quoted with respect and approval. The Privy Council observed that "just as it is essential that every one accused of a crime should have free access to a Court of justice so that he may be duly, acquitted if found not guilty of the offence with which he is charged, so it is of the utmost importance that the judiciary should not interfere with the police in matters which are within their province and into which the law imposes upon them the duty of enquiry". 3. The Privy Council further observed: "In India as has been shown there is a statutory right on the part of the police to investigate the circumstances of an alleged cognizable crime without requiring any authority from the judicial authorities, and it would, as their Lordships think, be an unfortunate result if it should be held possible to interfere with those statutory rights by an exerc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1980) 2 SCR 16], a three Judge Bench, speaking through Desai, J., after referring the precedents including Khwaza Nazir Ahmad, held: "There is a clear cut and well demarcated sphere of activity in the field of crime detection and crime punishment. Investigation of an offence is the field exclusively reserved for the executive through the police department, the superintendence over which vests in the State Government. The executive, which is charged with a duty to keep vigilance over law and order situation is obliged to prevent crime and if an offence is alleged to have been committed it is its bounden duty to investigate into the offence and bring the offender to book. Once it investigates and finds an offence having been committed it is its duty to collect evidence for the purpose of proving the offence. Once that is completed and the investigating officer submits report to the Court requesting the Court to take cognizance of the offence under Section 190 of the Code its duty comes to an end. On a cognizance of the offence being taken by the Court the police function of investigation comes to an end subject to the provision contained in Section 173(8), there commences th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....igating officer submits report to the court requesting the court to take cognizance of the offence under Section 190 Cr.P.C and his duty comes to an end." 7. Now, we shall revert to the facts of the case in order to consider whether the High Court properly applied the settled legal position to the facts of the case. On 18th September, 2006, M/s IVR Prime Urban Developers Ltd. (`IVR' for short) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the respondent herein wherein it was agreed upon by the respondent that he would facilitate the sale of about 600 acres of land situated at Sandavellor village of Kancheepuram District, Tamilnadu in favour of IVR for a valuable consideration of Rs. 28 lakhs per acre. It was mutually agreed upon between the parties that IVR would retain an amount of Rs. 2 lakh per acre towards security for timely performance of respondent's obligation under the MOU. The completion of the sale of the said land was to be done in two phases. The first phase for an extent of 450 acres was required to be completed before 31st November, 2006 and the second phase of remaining 150 acres on or before 28th February, 2007. The respondent agreed to arrange a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to seize an amount of Rs. 2,28,00,000/- from the appellants claiming that he was entitled for an amount of Rs. 1,28,00,000/- for facilitating the registration of 64 acres of land under the MOU which amount is alleged to have been withheld by the appellants together with a sum of Rs. 1 crore which is stated to have been paid by him to the appellants. The petition filed in the High Court makes an interesting reading in which it was stated that the following questions arise for the consideration of the High Court: A. Whether the accused have not committed serious cognizable offences? B. Whether the termination of MOU is legally and morally correct? C. Whether the petitioner had not sustained a huge monetary loss of Rs. 5 crores, which was invested in the said project? D. Is it not the duty of the respondent police to seize the petitioner's money of Rs. 1,28,00,000/- from accused Nos. 1 to 3? E. Is it not the duty of the respondent police to seize the petitioner's money of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- from accused Nos. 4 to 6? F. Whether the claim of accused Nos. 1 to 3 that the petitioner has to pay a sum of Rs. 2 crores as liquidat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....incurable infirmities requiring interference of this Court. The respondent virtually sought to recover the amounts from the appellants in a proceeding filed under Section 482 of the Code which is impermissible in law. It was further submitted that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in issuing directions to the investigating agency to act in a particular manner which is unsustainable. 13. Mr. K.V. Mohan, the learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, supported the order and submitted that the High Court rightly interfered in the matter in the interest of justice. 14. The question that arises for our consideration is whether the contents of the petition submitted by the respondent reveal any cause for issuing directions guiding the Investigating Officer in the matter of exercise of statutory power and duty to investigate into crime that had already been registered and investigation was actually in progress? Whether such a direction could have been issued by the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code? 15. It is too fairly well settled and needs no restatement at our hands that the saving of the High Court's inherent powe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... person who has been concerned with any cognizable offence or against whom reasonable complaint has been made or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists of his having been so concerned. Obviously, he is not expected to act in a mechanical manner and in all cases to arrest the accused as soon as the report is lodged. In appropriate cases, after some investigation, the investigating officer may make up his mind as to whether it is necessary to arrest the accused person. At that stage the court has no role to play. Since the power is discretionary, a police officer is not always bound to arrest an accused even if the allegation against him is of having committed a cognizable offence. Since an arrest is in the nature of an encroachment on the liberty of the subject and does affect the reputation and status of the citizen, the power has to be cautiously exercised. It depends inter alia upon the nature of the offence alleged and the type of persons who are accused of having committed the cognizable offence. Obviously, the power has to be exercised with caution and circumspection." 17. It is further observed: "The principle, therefore, is well ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... if the High Court, in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot direct the investigating agency to investigate the case in accord with its views as that would amount to unwarranted interference, equally no such directions could be issued in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code. 20. Tested in the light of the principles aforesaid, the impugned order, in our considered opinion, must be held to be an order passed overstepping the limits of judicial interference. It was observed by this Court on more than one occasion, that even in Public Interest Litigation proceedings, appropriate directions may be issued and the purpose in issuing such directions is essentially to ensure performance of statutory duty by the investigating agency. The duty of the Court in such proceedings is to ensure that the agencies do their duties in compliance with law. The inherent power of the High Court is saved to interfere with the proceedings pending before a Criminal Court if such interference is required to secure the ends of justice or where the continuance of the proceedings before a Court amounts to abuse of the process of Court. Such a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ze the property and file charge sheet. This Court in Divine Retreat Centre V. State of Kerala & Ors.[(2008) 3 SCC 542] observed: "We are concerned with the question as to whether the High Court could have passed a judicial order directing investigation against the appellant and its activities without providing an opportunity of being heard to it. The case on hand is a case where the criminal law is directed to be set in motion on the basis of the allegations made in anonymous petition filed in the High Court. No judicial order can ever be passed by any court without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the person likely to be affected by such order and particularly when such order results in drastic consequences of affecting one's own reputation." (emphasis is of ours) 23. The High Court in the present case, without realizing the consequences, issued directions in a casual and mechanical manner without hearing the appellants. The impugned order is a nullity and liable to be set aside only on that score. 24. We are not impressed by the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent that the High Court did not issue any directions but ....