JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) A short question that arises for our consideration in
these appeals is whether it is open to the High Court in
exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure to interfere with the statutory power of
investigation by police into a cognizable offence If such a
power is available with the Court, what are the parameters
for its interference
(2.) It is well settled and this Court time and again,
reiterated that the police authorities have the statutory
right and duty to investigate into a cognizable offence
under the scheme of Code of Criminal Procedure (for
short '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, 1945 AIR(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 exercise of the inherent
jurisdiction of the Court. The functions of the
judiciary and the police are 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 had survived the passing of that Act."
(emphasis supplied);
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.