KEDAR NARAYAN PARIDA AND ORS. versus STATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.

Citation: [2009] 14 S.C.R. 575 · Decided: 16-09-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ALTAMAS KABIR · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 575 
~ 
KEDAR NARAYAN PARIDA AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
~ 
STATE OF ORISSA AND ANR. 
(Special Leave Petition (c) No. 19947 of 2008) 
SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 
B' 
[ALTAMAS KABIR AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.] 
1 
Investigation/Inquiry - Intervention by Court - Scope -
Held: When any illegality and/or ma/a fide action on part of 
lnve~tigating Authorities, either on its own or at the behest of c 
i 
an interested party, is brought to the notice of High Courts, 
the High Courts in exercise of their inherent and plenary 
powers are entitled to intervene to set right the illegality and! 
_or malafide action on the part of Investigating Authorities -
~ 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.173 - Constitution of 
D 
India, 1950 - Article 226. 
The Petitioners allegedly attacked the husband of 
respondent no.2 with various weapons and killed him. 12 
out of the 19 accused were taken out of the purview of 
E 
the charge-sheet, allegedly at the behest of an MLA. 
Respondent no.2 filed writ petition, on which the High 
Court held that the filing of chargesheet against only 7 
accused on the basis of the second test report of the IGP 
had no legal basis and allowed the writ petition with 
direction to the appropriate authorities to take action 
F 
against all the accused, according to law. According to 
the High Court, the earlier Supervision Note of the 
Additional S.P., which was in consonance with Rule 47-
A of the Orissa Police Manual and affirmed by the 
.. 
Inspector General of Police, C.1.0., as well as the Director 
G 
General of Police, was sufficient for the purpose of filing 
a charge-sheet and there was no justification for the 
issuance of a further direction to the Inspector General 
575 
H 
A 
8 
c 
0 
E 
F 
G 
H 
576 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
of Polite, Central Range, to issue a fresh "Test Report" 
and such di~ection was without any lawful authority. 
Dismissing the Special Leave Petition, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. One is unable to accept the submission 
that the High Court could not have interfered with the 
directions given by the Director General of Police to ·the 
Inspector General of Police to submit a fresh Test/Note 
despite the supervisory report which had been submitted 
by the Additional S.P. indicating that a case had been 
made out to go to trial as against all the 19 accused. When 
any illegality and/or ma/a fide action on the part of the 
Investigating Authorities, either on its own or at the 
. behest of an .interested party, is brought to the notice of .J 
the High Courts, the High Courts in exercise of their 
inherent and plenary powers are entitled to intervene to 
set right the illegality and/or ma/a fide action on the part 
of the Investigating Authorities. [Para 25] [592-A-C] 
1.2. In the instant case, although, the Supervisory 
Report submitted by the Additional SP, had been duly 
accepted not only by the Inspector General of Police but 
also by the Director General of Police, which was~ 
"\:> 
sufficient for the Magistrate to frame a charge against allJ\ 
the accused persons, a fresh direction was given to the 
Inspector General of police to submit a Test Note. Such 
a direction given after the intervention of a MLA, who 
went to the extent of providing an alibi for two of the· 
accused, claiming that they were present in his house1' 
when the incident had occurred, not only exudes an3 :· 
unpleasant flavour, but raises doubts about the~' 
bonafides of the police authorities at the highest level.3)\ 
[Para 26] (592-C-F] 
1.3. In fact, it is on account of such intervention that 
initially charge was filed only agair)st 4 of the accused 
+-
~-
)< 
KEDAR NARAYAN PARIDA AND ORS. v. STATE OF 577 
ORISSA AND ANR. 
• 
and, thereafter, 3 more. No steps were taken as far as the 
A 
remaining 12 accused were concerned and it is only 
when the· action of the said JVILA was questioned before 
the High Court, that charge was also filed against the 
remaining 12 accused persons. [Para 27] [592-F-H] 
~ 
' 
B 
1.4. The Courts, and in particular the High Courts, are 
the guardians of the life and liberty of the citizens and if 
there is any flavour of deliberate misuse of the authority 
.. 
vested in the Investigating Authority, the High Court w 
this Court may certainly step in to correct such injustice c 
or failure· of justice. [Para 28] [593-B-C] 
1.5.- In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this 
case, it was necessary for such a direction to be given 
by the High Court in or

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.