Head Of Police Does Not Require Formal Permission Of Concerned Court To Transfer Investigation To Another Police Station: Allahabad HC

A bench of Justice Umesh Chandra Sharma, while dismissing the application, observed, “…this Court is of the considered view that in the facts and circumstances of this case no formal permission of the concerned court was necessary for S.P. Deoria before transferring the investigation to another I.O of another Police Station”.

Advocate Neeraj Singh appeared for the applicant, and Government Advocate K.N. Mishra and R.K. Shahi appeared for the State.

In the present matter, an application under Section 482 CrPC was filed to quash the criminal proceeding for the offences under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452, 435, 504, and 506 IPC.

The applicants while relying on Hasanbhai Valibhai Qureshi v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 5 SCC 347 had taken only one ground that before passing an order to reinvestigate the case, the S.P. Deoria was duty-bound to take permission from the concerned Magistrate. In Hasanbhai Valibhai’s case, the Apex Court had held that the Police has to inform the Court and shall seek formal permission to make further investigation when fresh facts come to the light. In that matter, an application was moved to get the case investigated by an independent Agency other than the Police stating that the Local Police was under the pressure of the local MLA and the investigation was not carried out in a straight-forward manner.

Noting the factual difference in the present matter and the referred judgment, the bench was of the opinion that in the present case, no prayer was made to the SP Deoria to transfer the investigation to another agency, rather a request was made to transfer the investigation from one Police Station to another. Pursuant to which, on being satisfied, he transferred the investigation to Police Station Kotwali, Salempur, Deoria.

“In the cited case, an aspect of amendment of charge was also involved and Sections 228, 240 and 216 CrPC were also dealt with. The Apex Court had considered Section 173(8) of the CrPC and has held that it is open to the Police to conduct a proper investigation, even after the court took cognizance of any offence on the strength of a police report earlier submitted”, the bench noted in its order.

While relying on, Sri Bhagwan Samardha Sreepada Vallabha Venkata Vishwanandha Maharaj v. State of A.P., AIR 1999 SC 2332 and in N.P. Jharia v. State of M.P., AIR 2007 SC 2677, the bench also observed, “…that even after the Court took cognizance of any offence, on strength of police report first submitted, it is open to Police to conduct further investigation. In such a situation power of Court to direct the Police to conduct further investigation cannot have any inhibition. There is nothing in Section 173 (8) to suggest that the Court is obliged to hear the accused before any such direction is made. Casting of any such obligation on Court would only result in encumbering it with burden of searching for all potential accused to be afforded with opportunity of being heard”.

Accordingly, the bench rejected the application under Section 482 CrPC and vacated the stay order. Further directed the Judicial Magistrate II, Deoria, to conclude its trial as early as possible, as the matter has become very old.

Cause Title: Ram Komal and others v. State of U.P. and another [Neutral Citation: 2023:AHC:181196]