The Court dismissed a writ petition seeking transfer of investigation from local police to CB-CID. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court held an accused has no right to choose the investigating agency.
Transfer of investigation to CB-CID rejected; Writ Petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16870 of 2018
Petitioner :- Sultan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anjali Singh,Manvendra Nath Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Smt. Anjali Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pradeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 and Sri Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to direct the respondents nos. 1/2 to transfer the investigation of Case Crime No. 13 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 307 and 506 IPC, P.S. Kheta Sarain, District Jaunpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is though an accused in the present case, he has got himself bailed out and has come up before this Court for transfer of the investigation to C.B.C.I.D. or any other competent agency.
Learned counsel for the private respondent opposed the prayer and submitted that the informant of the present case- namely Nayyar Alam s/o Abdul Jabbar, respondent no. 5, had filed Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 18760 of 2018 in which the investigation has been expedited to be concluded within three months vide order dated 17.7.2018, copy of the said order is taken on record.
Learned A.G.A. pointed out that so far as other accused- persons are concerned non-bailable warrants have been issued against them.
After having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, we do not find any good ground for interference in the matter in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu Versus State of U.P. and others reported in AIR 2008 (2) SC 409 which has been recently followed in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage & others reported in (2016) 6 SCC 277 and moreover the accused has no right to choose the investigating agency as has been held by the Apex Court in catena of decisions.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 13.8.2018/A.P. Pandey
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court should transfer the investigation of the case to CB-CID at the request of the accused.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sakiri Vasu Versus State of U.P. and othersFollowed¶9
AIR 2008 (2) SC 409 · Who else cites this
Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage & othersFollowed¶9
(2016) 6 SCC 277 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sultan
State Of U.P.
Nayyar Alam
Ramesh Sinha
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
