Singh Vs. The State of U.P  Insc 352 (16 June 2006)
Pasayat & Altamas Kabir Arijit Pasayat, J.
petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in
short the 'Constitution') is for a direction to conduct enquiry by the Central
Bureau of Investigation (in short the 'CBI') into the murder of one Yashvir
Singh, son of the petitioner. The allegation is that though First Information
Report (in short the 'FIR') has been lodged with the police to the effect that
said Yashvir Singh has been murdered and has not committed suicide, because of
the pressure of some influencial people, police has not taken any positive
steps, and on the contrary the petitioner is being harassed and threatened by
certain persons. As culled out from the petition, said Yashvir Singh was posted
as Additional Commissioner of Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh and was found dead in
his official residence on 19th January, 2006. Petitioner made a grievance that the police officials in collusion
with some relatives - more particularly in-laws of the deceased- Yashvir Singh
are projecting it as a case of suicide. It is stated that the petitioner has
made several representations to various authorities, but without any avail. It
is pointed out that the Superintendent of Police had directed the officer in
charge of the concerned police station to enquire into the matter in view of
the allegations made by the petitioner. But it is the grievance of the
petitioner that no action has been taken purportedly on the basis of the
pressure exercised by some influential people who were inimical to the deceased
though they are related to him. In essence grievance is that no action is being
taken on the First Information Report lodged by the petitioner.
XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Code') relates to "
Information to the Police and their Powers to Investigate". Section 154
reads as follows : Information in cognizable cases.
information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally
to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him
or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such
information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall
be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered
in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may
prescribe in this behalf.
A copy of the
information as recorded under sub-section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of
cost, to the informant.
aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a police station
to record the information referred to in sub-section (1) may send the substance
of such information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police
concerned who, if satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a
cognizable offence, shall either investigate the case himself or direct an
investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him, in the
manner provided by this Code, and such officer shall have all the powers of an
officer in charge of the police station in relation to that offence.
156 deals with "Police officer's power to investigate cognizable
cases" and the same reads as follows:
Any officer in
charge of a police station may, without the order of a Magistrate, investigate
any cognizable case which a Court having jurisdiction over the local area
within the limits of such station would have power to inquire into or try under
the provisions of Chapter XIII.
proceeding of a police officer in any such case shall at any stage be called in
question on the ground that the case was one which such officer was not
empowered under this section to investigate.
empowered under section 190 may order such an investigation as above-
the information is laid with the police, but no action in that behalf is taken,
the complainant can under Section 190 read with Section 200 of the Code lay the
complaint before the Magistrate having jurisdiction to take cognizance of the
offence and the Magistrate is required to enquire into the complaint as
provided in Chapter XV of the Code. In case the Magistrate after recording
evidence finds a prima facie case, instead of issuing process to the accused,
he is empowered to direct the police concerned to investigate into offence
under Chapter XII of the Code and to submit a report. If he finds that the
complaint does not disclose any offence to take further action, he is empowered
to dismiss the complaint under Section 203 of the Code. In case he finds that
the complaint/evidence recorded prima facie discloses an offence, he is
empowered to take cognizance of the offence and would issue process to the
accused. These aspects have been highlighted by this Court in All India
Institute of Medical Sciences Employees' Union
(Reg) through its President v. Union of India and Others [(1996) 11 SCC 582].
It was specifically observed that a writ petition in such cases is not to be
above position was again highlighted recently in Gangadhar Janardan Mhatre v.
State of Maharashtra [(2004) 7 SCC 768] and in Minu Kumari
and Another v. State of Bihar and Others [(2006) 4 SCC 359].
being so, this petition is not to be entertained. It is case of the petitioner
that he is under constant threat by some persons and his life and property are
in danger. If he seeks any protection, it is the duty of the concerned police
officials to provide such security as are warranted in the circumstances in
accordance with law.
writ petition is accordingly dismissed.