HEMANT DAYALAL BHATT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure questioning the order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 40th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai in Case No. 32/M/2008 directing re-investigation and transferring the investigation to an officer other than a police officer attached to Malabar Hill Police Station. Facts in brief as are necessary for the decision of this application may briefly be stated thus:-

(2.) Mr. Jethmalani, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has invited our attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bhagwant Singh vs. Commissioner of Police & anr., 1985 2 SCC 537 . We may usefully reproduce para 4 of the said judgment, which reads thus:-

(3.) Mr. Jethmalani, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has further invited our attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Vinay Tyagi vs. Irshad Ali @ Deepak and ors., 2013 5 SCC 762. At paragraph 30 of the judgment, the Supreme Court has referred to the observations of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs. CBI, 2011 9 SCC 182, wherein the Supreme Court noticed the distinction between "reinvestigation" and "further investigation". The Supreme Court also noticed the settled principle that the courts subordinate to the High Court do not have the statutory inherent powers as the High Court does under Section 482 of the Code and, therefore, must exercise their jurisdiction within the four corners of the Code.