STATE Vs. BHERONLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application has been preferred by the State Government against the order dated the 16 th of Agust, 1960 passed by the Sessions Judge Bhind, in Special Case No. 27 of 1960.

(2.) THE opponent Bheronlal Sharma was prosecuted for offences under S. 161 I. P. C. and S. 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (No. II of 1947). An objection was raised on behalf of the defence to the effect that the investigation in the case had not been made by an officer of the Special Police force constituted by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred on it by sub -section (1) of S. 2 of the Central Provinces and Berar Special Police Establisment Act (No. XVII of 1947). This objection found favour with the learned Sessions Judge, with the result that he by the impugned order directed the papers to be returned to the District Police Prosecutor with the direction that the offence should be re -investigated by an officer competent 10 investigate in accordance with the provisions of the Notifications referred to by the learned Sessions Judge in his order. On behalf of the State Government the correctness of this order has been challenged before me.

(3.) THE question which arises for, consideration before me is whether by this notification (No. 113 -89 -I(VI) -59) dated the 1st of November, 1959 the State Govt. could and did in fact take away the powers of the ordinary police to investigate into the offences mentioned therein, I do not find anything in the Act No. XVII of 1957 or the notification made thereunder which would justify such a conclusion. According to S. 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure all offences under the Indian Penal Code are to be investigated according to the provisions contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure; whereas all offences under any other law have to be investigated according to the provision of the Code, but subject to any enactment for time being in force regulating the manner or place of such investigation.