LexSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. ETC. versus SAMPAT LAL & ORS. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
B c D F G H 256 STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. ETC. v. SAMPAT LAL & ORS. ETC. December 4, 1984 [P. N. BHAGWAT, AMARENDRA NATH SEN AND RANGANATH Ml£RA JJ.] Code ofCrlm1'nal Procedure, 1913-Death under susplclous clrcumstan· ces-Al/egatlon of murder-ln.-stlgatlon still in the hands of pollce-Hl1h Court appointing a Special Officer to inquire into the affence-Judlcia/ inter· ference in l11vestlgatlon-Whenarlses. "inquiry'' and "investlgation"-Difference beiween. Natural Justice-Letter to the Chief Justice of High Court treated at writ peti'tlon-Death under JUspicious circumstances-Allegation of murder- High Court fssaing dfrection to enquire into causes of death-No opportunity given to the State Police officers-Whether violatil'e of principles of Natural jutlce. Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946-ss. 5 and 6-Whether s.6 applicable when Court gives direction to C.B.I. to conduct an investigatron. The respondents addressed two letters to the Chief Justice of tho Calcutta High Court reaarding mysterious death of two young boys I ving in Barrackpore area near Calcutta allegioa, inter alia, that the local piOlice was not conducting the investigation into the unnatural death of the two boys fairly and properly and was trying to make it a case of suicide and requested the High Court to order a thorough investigation into the incident by an independent machinCry which would command confidence and be acceptable to the local police. A Sinale Judge of the High Court, before whom the letters were placed, treated the two letters as a formal petitio_n and, without giving notice directed issue of a rule to the State of West Bena:al and other authorities to show cause why a writ in the nature of mandamus may not be issued directing investigation in accordance with law to be conducted over the unnatural death of the two boys. Jn the meanwhile the Judge also apQointed Deputy Inspector General, Central Bureau of Investigation to make as inquiry and report to the High Court as to bow l • , • • WEST BENGAL v. SAMPAT LAL 257 the two boys met their death. The appellants preferred an appeal against the said order before the Division Beach which also confirm~d the order of the Single Judge with the modification that the DIG, CBI will act as a special officer. Hence this appeal. The appellants contended (i) that the order of the Single Judge was vitiated having been made in violation of rules of natural justice; (ii) that the order wa5 also bad as the learned Single Judge had not cared to inform ~imself as to the stage of investigation and if there was any lacuna therein and ho proceeded to act on certain assumptions for which there was no basis or foundation; (iii) that since there had been no breach of duty, the court had oo jurisdiction to interfere with the investigation which, under the law, was vested in the police au•.horities and therefore tbe directions given by the Single Judge and upheld with certain modifications by the DivisiQn Bench \'ere not proper. Allowing tho appeal, HELD: J. It is clear from the order passed by the Learned Single Judge that no hearing was afforded to the State Government or its officers when direction to appoint the special officer in whom power of inquiry. was to be vested was made. There was no basis at that stage to assume that the contents of the Jetters as also the facts stated in the c:>lumos of the newspaper had not been contradicted, It was the State Government or its officers who alone could have authori tativeJy indicated the facts showing whether tbe allegations contained in the letters or the newspaper report were true aDd if so to what extent or how the investigation was being carried on and what stage it had retched so as to enable the court to come to a pr/ma facie authorities were not discharging properly their statutory obligation to carry out an investigation. But wten no notice was given to the State Government and no opportunity was offered to themj it is difficult to see how an ex parte order could be made on such an assumption. If the facts stated in the letter or tbe writ petition are credible and there is such urgency that the ends of justice might be defeated by not making an ex parte order or giving of notice without ex parte order might lead to aggrevation of oppression or exploitation or removal or elimination of evidenceJ the court would certainly be justified in making an l!x parte order.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.