STATE REP Vs. V JAYAPAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Whether the High Court was justified in quashing the criminal proceedings on the ground that the police officer, who laid/recorded the FIR regarding the suspected commission of certain cognizable offences by the respondent should not have investigated the case and submitted the final report That is the question which arises for consideration in this appeal filed by the State.

(3.) On 9-9-1996, the Inspector of Police (Vigilance and Anti-Corruption), Tirucharapalli on the basis of the information received that the respondent-accused was indulging in corrupt practices by extracting money from the drivers and owners of the motor vehicles while conducting check of the vehicles and making use of certain bogus notice forms in the process, prepared the First Information Report, registered the crime under Sections 420, 201 IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. A copy of the FIR was submitted to the Court of CJM-cum-special Judge, Tirucharapalli. He then proceeded to take up investigation, gathered information, examined the witnesses and filed the charge-sheet in the Court together with a list of documents including the police notice books and handwriting experts' reports. The respondent was implicated for the offences under Sections 465, 468 IPC and Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of P. C. Act. The respondent-accused then moved the High Court of Madras to quash the proceedings. The learned Judge of the High Court, relying on the decision of this Court in Megha Singh v. State of Haryana ((1996) 11 SCC 709) and the two other decisions of the Madras High Court, allowed the application and quashed the proceedings. This is what the learned Judge observed :