Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3
PETITIONER:
STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
S. N. BASAK
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
12/04/1962
BENCH:
KAPUR, J.L.
BENCH:
KAPUR, J.L.
GUPTA, K.C. DAS
DAYAL, RAGHUBAR
CITATION:
1963 AIR 447 1963 SCR (2) 52
CITATOR INFO :
F 1968 SC 117 (10)
F 1972 SC 484 (12)
R 1974 SC1146 (6,10)
RF 1982 SC 949 (18,53)
R 1985 SC 195 (21)
RF 1992 SC 604 (92)
ACT:
Police Investigation--Report by Police, Enforcement
Branch--Motion to quash--High Court, Powers of--Indian Penal
Code, 1860 (Act XLV of 1860), ss. 420, 12OB--Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898), ss. 154, 156, 439
and 561A.
HEADNOTE:
A Sub-Inspcctor of Police, Enforcement Branch, filed a
report before the Police Officer-in-charge of a Police
Station alleging that the respondent along with three others
committed offences under ss.420, 120B read with s.420 Indian
Penal Code. Thereupon a First Information Report was drawn
up and investigation was started. The respondent
surrendered before the judicial Magistrate and he was
released on bail. Subsequently he filed an application in
the High Court under ss. 439 and 561 A of the Criminal
Procedure Code to get the case pending before the judicial
Magistrate arising out of the
53
case registered in the Police Station quashed. This appli-
cation was granted by the High Court. The appellant the
State of West Bengal then filed an appeal before the Supreme
Court by certificate granted by the High Court under Art.
134 (1) (c) of the Constitution.
Held, that the statutory powers given to the Police under
ss. 154 and 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to
investigate into the circumstances of an alleged cognizable
offence without authority from a Magistrate cannot be
interfered with by the exercise of powers under s.439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure or under the inherent powers
conferred by s. 561A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The
High Court was therefore in error in allowing the
respondent’s application.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3
King Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmad, (1944) L.R. 71 I.A. 203
allowed.
JUDGMENT:
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 30 of
1961.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated September 6, 1960
of the Calcutta High Court in Cr. Revision No. 647 of 1960.
B. Sen, P. K. Chatterjee and P. K. Bose, for the
appellant.
D. C. Roy and P. K. Mukherjee, for the respondent.
1962. April 12. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
KAPUR, J.-This is an appeal against the judgment and order
of the High Court of Calcutta quashing the investigation
started against the respondent in regard to offences under
s. 420, Indian Penal Code, and s. 120B read with s. 420 of
the Indian Penal Code.
On March 26, 1960, Sub- Inspector.B. L. Gbose of Police
Inforcement Branch filed a written report before the
Officer-in-charge Chakdha P. S., alleging that the
respondent in conspiracy with three others
54
had cheated the Government of West Bengal of a sum of Rs.
20,000. The respondent at the time was an Assistant-cum-
Executive Engineer, Kancbrapara Development Area, Kalyani
Division. On the basis of this report a First Information
Report was drawn up and the police started investigation. On
April 4, 1960, the respondent surrendered in the court of
the Judicial Magistrate at Ranaghat and was released on bail
for a sum of Rs. 1,000/-. The respondent then on May 9,
1960, filed a petition under ss. 439 and 561A of the
Criminal Procedure Code and prayed for a rule against the
District Magistrate, Nadia, to show cause why the judicial
case pending in the court of the Senior Magistrate
Ranagaghat arising out of the Chakdah Police Station Case
No. 33 dated March 26, 1960, be not quashed. The High Court
held :-
"In our view, the statutory power of
investigation given to the police under
Chapter XIV is not available in respect of an
offence triable under the West Bengal Criminal
Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act 1949, and
that being so, the investigation concerned is
without jurisdiction. In so saying, we are
consicious of the observations of their Lord-
ships of the Privy Council in Nazir Ahmad’s
case, 71 Indian Appeals, 203".
and therefore quashed the police investigation of the case
holding it to be without jurisdiction. It is against this
judgment and order that the state has come in appeal to this
Court on a certificate granted by the High Court under Art.
134 (1) (c)
At the time the respondent filed the petition in the High
Court only a written report was made to the police by the
Sub-Inspector of police Enforcement Branch and on the basis
of that report a :First Information Report was recorded by
the
55
Officer-in-charge of the Police Station and investigation
had started. There was no case pending at the time
excepting that the respondent had appeared before the Court,
had surrendered and had’ been admitted to bail. The powers
of investigation into cognizable offences are contained in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3
Chapter XIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 154
which is in that Chapter deals with information in
cognizable offences and s. 156 with investigation into such
offences and under these sections the police has the
statutory right to investigate into the circumstances of any
alleged cognizable offence without authority from a Magi-
strate and this statutory power of the police to investigate
cannot be interfered with by the exercise of power under s.
439 or under the inherent power of the court under s. 561A
of Criminal Procedure Code. As to the powers of the
Judiciary in regard to statutory right of the police to
investigate, the Privy Council in King Emperor v. Khwaja
Nazir Ahmad (1) observed as follows:-
"The functions of the judiciary and the police
are complementary, not overlapping, and the
combination of individual liberty with a due
observance of law and order is only to be
obtained by leaving each to exercise its own
function, always, a course, subject to the
right of the court to intervene in an
appropriate case when moved under s. 491 of
the Criminal Procedure Code to give directions
in the nature of habeas, corpus. In such a
case as the present, however, the court’s
functions begin when a charge is preferred
before it, and not until then. It has
sometimes been thought that a. 561A has given
increased powers to the Court which it did not
possess before that section was enacted. But
this is not so, the section gives no now
powers, it
(1)(1944),L..R. 71. 1. A. 203, 212.
56
only provides that those which the court
already inherently possesses shall be
preserved and is inserted as their Lordships
think, lest it should be considered that the
only powers possessed by the court are those
expressly conferred by the Criminal Procedure
Code and that no inherent powers had survived
the passing of that Act".
With this interpretation, which has been put on the
statutory duties and. powers of the police and of the powers
of the Court, we are in accord. The High Court was in error
therefore in interfering with the powers of the police in
investigating into the offence which was alleged in the
information sent to the Officer-in-charge of the police
station.
We therefore allow this appeal and set aside the order of
the High Court. The investigation will now proceed in
accordance with law.
Appeal allowed.