SANJAY SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed by the petitioners in public interest challenging the action of the respondents whereby reinvestigation is handed over to CID in violation of Chapter 12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Regulation 16 of the M.P. Police Regulations.

(2.) QUESTION raised by the petitioners is that on intervention of politicians or people having influence, investigation in criminal case is hampered by conducting parallel investigation or fresh investigation by the police in criminal cases in violation of the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure and Police Regulations. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that order was passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 446/05 that in case respondent No.5 Ramlakhan Dhakad is absconding and warrant of arrest has been issued against him and he is wanted in any criminal case, Superintendent of Police, Morena shall ensure action in the matter and send compliance report to the Registry of this Court. After the orders of this Court, names of Ramlakhan and Pramod Dhakad were deleted from the challan papers which is apparent from Annexure P -2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that a complaint under sections 302 and 307, Indian Penal Code has been registered against one Bakhtawar Singh, who is retired Additional Superintendent of Police. Said Bakhtawar Singh met one Shivraj Singh Chauhan, Member of Parliament and said Shivraj Singh Chauhan wrote a letter to the Chief Minister vide Annexure P -5. On the letter, Chief Minister directed that the investigation be conducted by CID. In the complaint it was alleged that investigation for an offence under sections 302 and 307 Indian Penal Code in Crime No. 63/2005 is not carried out properly. In pursuance of this letter, final report was submitted by Devendra Singh Sisodiya that no case is made out against Bakhtawar Singh, Palvinder, Narendra Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Vindar Singh, Harisingh, Gurulal and Jitendra Singh. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that this type of report by holding parallel inquiry or reinvestigation by CID is demoralizing the police force and the alleged accused are released without any trial. He submitted that direction to hold inquiry by CID in contravention of Regulation 16 of the Police Regulations deserves to be quashed. Any person who is accused of some crime must prove his innocence before the Court. Similarly, Ramlakhan has also submitted an application to the Superintendent of Police, Morena, praying therein that investigation be conducted by some senior police officer. Superintendent of Police, Morena directed SDO(P), Joura, to conduct inquiry. SDO(P) Morena, conducted the inquiry and found that Ramlakhan Dhakad and Pramod Dhakad were not involved in the crime. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that on account of directions of parallel inquiry or inquiry by some superior officer, wrong message is going to the public that if somebody is in a position to wield influence, he can shun the investigation against him by adopting aforesaid method.

(3.) QUESTION involved in the case is whether on the complaint of accused to the Chief Minister or Member of Parliament or MLA, whether fresh investigation by other investigating agency or by some higher authority can be ordered or whether fresh investigation can be permitted or fresh FIR can he lodged.