- (1.) S. K. Phaujdar, J. All these four cases have been taken up together as a common prayer has been made and a com mon point of law arises. These applica tions relate to case Crime Nos. 178 of 1991 (under Section 307 I. P. C. , RS. Khekhra), 87 of 1997 (under Section 302, I. P. C, P. S. Modi Nagar), 352 of 1991 (under Section 307, I. P. C, P. S. Brahmapuri), 523 of 1993 (under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307, I. P. C, P. S. Lalunti), all belonging to Dis trict Meerut.
(2.) IN the first-mentioned case, the applicant was not mentioned in the F. I. R. The only person named therein was Rabi Datt Tyagi against whom a charge-sheet was submitted. It is stated that Rabi Dati is dead but there has been an initiation of a further investigation after submission of the charge-sheet. IN the second-men tioned case, one Kamal Kishore was named in the FIR with two unknown per sons and charge-sheet was submitted. IN this case also further investigation has been taken (sic) subsequently. The third case, as above, was initiated against Rabi Datt Tyagi and another. There was no in jury caused to anybody. Rabi Datt Tyagi was allegedly arrested on the spot. Charge-sheet was submitted. Rabi Datt died there after and subsequently a further investiga tion has been started in this case. The fourth case was one in which the applicant was named as an accused and though charge-sheet was submitted the matter was being investigated further by the local police. The applicant Chandra Prakash Tyagi claims to bean advocate practising in the District Bar, Meerut, and claimmem-bership of the Supreme Court Bar As sociation also. As stated above, the com mon prayer in all these cases is that inves tigation may been trusted to the CBCID or the CBI.
(3.) WHEN asked as to whether this Court in exercise of powers under Section 482, Cr. PC. could interfere in investiga tion in view of the positive bar as pronounced by this Court in Ram Lal's case as also in the case of A. S. Bindra (Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 1342 of 1997), the learned Counsel submitted that once charge-sheet was submitted the Court could exercise its powers under Section 482, Cr. P. C. and it would not be an inter ference in the investigation. The learned A. G. A. , however, stated that even though it is conceded that the power's under Section 482, Cr. P. C. could be exercised in respect of this further investigation the very prayer is untenable in the light of the dictum of the Supreme Court in the case of C. B. I. v. Rajesh Gandi, as reported in 1997 Crl. Law Journal at page 63, A reading of this case-law indi cates that the Supreme Court had clearly ruled that the accused could not have a say in the matter of agency of investigation. He cannot choose the agency which would investigate into the offence with which he is charged. The Supreme Court ruled that the decision to investigate or the decision on the agency which should investigate the offence did not attract principles of natural justice.;