R SARALA Vs. T S VELU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Investigation and prosecution are two different facets in the administration of criminal justice. The role of Public Prosecutor is inside the Court, whereas investigation is outside the Court. Normally the role of Public Prosecutor commences after investigating agency presents the case in the Court on culmination of investigation. Its exception is that Public Prosecutor may have to deal with bail applications moved by the parties concerned at any stage. Involving the Public Prosecutor in investigation is unjudicious as well as pernicious in law. At any rate no investigating agency can be compelled to seek opinion of a Public Prosecutor under the orders of Court. Here is a case wherein the Investigation Officer concerned is directed by the High Court to take back the case from the Court whereat it was laid by him after completing the investigation and he is further directed to consult the Public Prosecutor and submit a fresh charge-sheet in tune with the opinion of the Public Prosecutor. Is such a course permissible in law

(3.) A summary of the factual background of this case can be given thus: A young bride - Selvi committed suicide on 29-12-1997 by hanging hereself on a ceiling fan in the bedroom of her nuptial home. Her husband was Arasu Elango. Their marriage was solemnised on 12-5-1997. As the interval between their wedding and Selvi's suicide was so short that an inquiry under Section 174(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') was held. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate conducted the inquiry and submitted a report holding that "it is conclusively proved that due to mental restlessness Selvi had committed suicide; no one is responsible and hence it is informed that her death is not due to dowry harassment."