TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (2) TMI 418
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case of Prashant Gaur v. State of U.P. 1988 All WC 828 (supra) and the answers given with respect to them are as follows: Question No. 1: Whether under Section 482 Cr. P.C. the High Court has inherent powers to interfere with the investigation by the Police? ANSWER: Investigation into an offence is a statutory function of the police and the superintendence thereof is vested in the State Government, It is only in the rarest of rare cases, and that too, when it is found by the Court that the FIR and the investigation over a reasonable length of time, do not disclose the commission of a cognizable offence, or any offence of any kind, that the High Court may, under Section 482 of the Code interfere with the investigation. Question No. 2: Whether the High Court has powers to stay arrest during investigation? ANSWER: Under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court, may not direct the stay of arrest during investigation except for a limited period in case of such exceptional nature as is referred in the proceeding paragraphs.  ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... complementary not overlapping and the combination of individual liberty with a due observance of law and order is, only to be obtained by leaving each to exercise its own function, always, of course, subject to the right of the Court to intervene in an appropriate case when moved under Section 491, Criminal P.C., to give directions in the nature of habeas corpus. In such a case as the present, however, the Court's functions begin when a charge is preferred before it and not until then. It has sometimes been thought that Section 561A has given increased powers to the Court which it did not possess before that section was enacted. But this is not so. The section gives no new powers, it only provides that those which the Court already inherently possess shall be preserved and is inserted, as their Lordships think, lest it should be considered that the only powers possessed by the Court are those expressly conferred by the Criminal Procedure Code, and that no inherent power has survived the passing of that Act. No doubt, if no cognizable offence is disclosed, and still more if no offence of any kind is disclosed, the police would have no authority to undertake an investigation. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code the High Court does not interfere with such investigation because it would then be impeding investigation and jurisdiction of statutoty authorities to exercise power in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. In the case of Jehan Singh v. Delhi Administration after referring to the case of State of West Bengal v. S. N. Basak 1963 (1) Cri LJ 341 (SC) (supra) it was held (Para 3 of AIR and Cri LJ): Here also, no police challan or charge-sheet against the accused had been laid in court, when the petitions under Section 561-A were filed. The impugned proceedings were those which were being conducted in the course of police investigation. Prima facie, therefore, the rule in Basak's case would be attracted In the case of Kurukshetra University v. State of Haryana it was held : It surprises us in the extreme that the High Court thought that in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it could quash a first information report. The police had not even commenced investigation into the complaint filed by the Warden of the University and no proceeding at a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... we have several authorities of this Court where interference by the court into police investigation has not been approved. 6. And the decision of the Privy Council in the case of Emperor v. Nazir Ahmad (1945) 46 Cri LJ 413 (PC) (supra) and the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of S. N. Sharma v. Bipen Kumar Tewari 1976 Cri LJ 764 (supra), and State of Bihar v. J.A.C. Saldana 1980 Cri LJ 98 (supra) were approved. 7. It is thus settled law that the power of the police to investigate into a report which discloses the commission of a cognizable offence is unfettered and cannot be interfered with by this Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C. 8. The question that requires determination is whether an investigation can be quashed in the exercise of the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr. P.C. if no offence is disclosed in the first information report. 9. It is noteworthy that in the case of Emperor v. Nazir Ahmad (1945) 46 Cri LJ 413 (PC) (supra) although it was held: No doubt if no cognizable offence is disclosed, and still more if no offence of any kind is disclosed the police would have no authority to undertak....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etimes overlooked, that the Privy Council took care to qualify its statement of the law by saying that the judiciary should not interfere with the police in matters which are within their province. It is surely not within the province of the police to investigate into a report which does not disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and the Code does not impose upon them the duty of inquiry in such cases.... The position which emerges from these decisions and the other decisions, which are discussed by Brother A. N, Sen is that the condition precedent to the commencement of investigation under Section 157 of the Code is that the FIR must disclose, prima facie, that a cognizable offence has been committed. It is wrong to suppose that the police have an unfettered discretion to commence investigation under Section 157 of the Code. Their right of inquiry is conditioned by the existence of reason to suspect the commission of a cognizable offence and they cannot, reasonably, have reason so to suspect unless the FIR, prima facie, discloses the commission of such offence. If that condition is satisfied, the investigation must go on and the rule in Khwaja Nazir Ahmad will ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and scope of the inherent power of the High Court under Section 561-A of the Code. The said section saves the inherent power of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code or to prevent abuse of the process of the court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. There is no doubt that this inherent power cannot be exercised in regard to matters specifically covered by the other provisions of the Code. : In the present case the magistrate before whom the police report has been filed under Section 173 of the Code has yet not applied his mind to the merits of the said report and it may be assumed in favour of the appellant that his request for the quashing of the proceedings is not at the present stage covered by any specific provision of the Code. It is well established that the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court can be exercised to quash proceedings in a proper case either to prevent the abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Ordinarily criminal proceedings instituted against an accused person must be tried under the provisions of the Code, and the High Court would be reluctant to int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e High Court would not embark upon an enquiry as to whether the evidence in question is reliable or not. That is the function of the trial magistrate, and ordinarily it would not be open to any party to invoke the High Court's inherent jurisdiction and contend that on a reasonable appreciation of the evidence the accusation made against the accused would not be sustained. Broadly stated that is the nature and scope of the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 561-A in the matter of quashing criminal proceedings, and that is the effect of the judicial decisions on the point. 14. The aforesaid observations are obviously applicable to proceedings in court after the submission of a charge-sheet or a complaint but are not applicable to investigation before the submission of the charge-sheet in court when proceedings for collection of evidence are conducted by a police officer. 15. It is true that in the case of Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar it was held: We now come to the question as to whether or not a clear allegation of entrustment and misappropriation of properties was made by the appellant in her complaint and, if so, was the High Court justified i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvinced that the power of investigation has been exercised mala fide. 18. With great respect we are not in agreement with the view taken in the case of Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab (supra) as it is in conflict with the decisions of the Privy Council in the case of Emperor v. Nazir Ahmad (1945) 46 Cri LJ 413 (supra) and the Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal v. Swapan Kumar Guha 1982 Cri LJ 819 (supra) and also for the reasons given by us earlier. 19. The High Court thus has no inherent power under Section 482 Cr. P.C. to interfere with the investigation by the police. 20. Section 41(l)(a) Cr. P.C. is as follows: 41(1) Any police officer may without an order from a Magistrate and without a warrant, arrest any person - (a) who has been concerned in any cognizable offence, or against whom a reasonable complaint has been made, or credible information has been received or a reasonable suspicion exists of his having been so concerned. 21. Section 41(1)(a) Cr. P.C. thus confers power on a police officer regarding the arrest of a person with respect to a cognizable offence. This statutory power is exercised by a police officer during the inves....