Page 1

1

REPORTABLE

          IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 77  OF 2016 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 1458/2015)

POOJA PAL   .…APPELLANT

Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ...RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T  

AMITAVA ROY,J.

Leave granted.

2. The appellant, widow of slain Raju Pal, who at his death

was a sitting M.L.A. of Uttar Pradesh State Assembly, is before

this court in her relentless pursuit for securing investigation

by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the stirring

incident of murderous attack on her husband, snuffing their a

week  old  marital  tie.  This  is  the  appellant's  second  outing

before  this  forum,  she  having  been  relegated  earlier  to  the

High Court, to seek the remedy at the first instance. By the

Page 2

2

decision  impugned,  the  High  Court  has  declined  the  relief

sought for.

3. We have heard Mr. R. S. Sodhi, learned senior counsel

for the appellant, Ms. V. Mohana, learned senior counsel for

the  respondent  Nos.  1  &  2,  Mr.  P.N.Misra,  learned  senior

counsel for the respondent No. 3  and Mr. Manoj Goel, learned

counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

4. The eventful factual backdrop is outlined by the available

pleadings.  First the facts as narrated by the appellant.  In the

bye-elections  to  the  vacant  seat  of  Allahabad  (West)   State

Assembly,  held  in  the  month  of  October  2004,  the  same

having been vacated on the resignation of its incumbent Atiqe

Ahmed, respondent No. 4, he having been elected as a Member

of  Parliament  from  Phoolpur  constituency,  Allahabad,  the

appellant's  husband  was  elected  thereto  by  defeating  the

nearest  contender  Mohd.  Ashraf  set-up  by  the  Samajwadi

Party.  Whereas the appellant’s husband as the candidate of

the Bahujan Samaj Party (for short hereinafter referred to as

“BSP.”) secured 70537 votes against 65713 votes polled by the

Page 3

3

respondent  No.  5,  the  other  candidates  representing  the

Congress  and  Bhartiya  Janta  Party  fared  very  poorly  in

comparison. According to the appellant, since his defeat, Moh.

Ashraf @ Khalid Azeem the respondent No. 5, along with his

brother  Atiqe  Ahmed respondent  No.  4 as well  as  the  then

Chief  Minister  of  the  State  had taken the  set-back to  be a

matter of personal humiliation, defeat and insult so much so

that  the  respondent  No.  4  declared  in  public  that  the

candidate elected would not be able to hold the seat for long. It

has  been alleged by  the  appellant  that  subsequent  thereto,

continuous attempts were made to eliminate Raju Pal and that

too  with  the  connivance  of  the  local  police  and  at  the

instigation of the respondent No. 4. The appellant has asserted

that  as  a  consequence,  the  family  members  and  the

supporters  of  her  husband  very  often  were  assaulted  and

subjected to harassment by arrests by the police and hired

goons engaged by the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and that their

property and personal belongings were even destroyed.

Page 4

4

5. The appellant alleged as well that the respondent No. 5

was a history sheeter against whom several cases had been

lodged involving the offence of murder, but on account of his

political  clout  and  the  following  of  anti-social  elements,  no

witness  would  even  dare  to  give  evidence  of  his  nefarious

activities. This was more so, according to the appellant, as he

enjoyed police patronage and protection. The appellant stated

that after the election of her husband as the Member of the

Legislative Assembly on 16.10.2004, three abortive attempts

were made on his life and the properties belonging to him and

his  close  relatives  were  ransacked  and  taken  away.  The

appellant mentioned that the last attempt on the life of her

husband  before  the  gruesome  incident  was  made  on

28.12.2004. Prior thereto amongst others, an attempt was also

made in the month of November, 2004, whereafter Raju Pal

did submit a representation to the Governor of the State on

04.11.2004, following which the said constitutional authority

had directed an inquiry to be made.

Page 5

5

6. According to the appellant  though the Governor  of  the

State had directed that additional security be provided to her

husband,  it  was not  done and instead his  existing security

staff  was replaced by  the  State  Government.  Such was the

animosity  as  alleged  by  the  appellant,  that  the  State

Government even had withdrawn Raju Pal's  official  gunners

for whose timely intervention, he survived the attempt on his

life on 28.12.2004 by the hired goons and henchmen of the

respondent Nos. 4 and 5. The appellant has alleged that the

two official gunners of her husband were replaced by others on

the choice of the local police and the desire of the respondent

Nos. 4 and 5 to ensure that Raju Pal does not escape the next

attempt. That in connection with the incident of 28.12.2004,

Raju Pal had lodged a First Information Report with the police

in which he had named these respondents has been stated as

well. This notwithstanding, buckling under political pressure,

the police even deleted the name of respondent No. 5 from the

F.I.R. and made a formality of some investigation.

Page 6

6

7.  The appellant has stated that on the date of the incident

i.e. 25.01.2005 at 3 P.M., her husband Raju Pal was travelling

in  a  vehicle  accompanied  by  his  two  supporters  Sandeep

Yadav and Devi Lal Pal.  His two official gunners instead of

accompanying him, and as a part of the conspired plan were

travelling in the second car behind his vehicle. The vehicle in

which the appellant's husband was travelling along with his

friend Singh Sahib and his wife on reaching Amit Deep Maruti

Agency,  was  intercepted  and  surrounded  by  eight  persons,

whereupon the respondent No. 5 Mohd. Ashraf shot him in his

head.  In course of the shoot-out, Sandeep Yadav, Devi Dayal

Pal and the appellant’s  husband were seriously injured and

they eventually succumbed to the injuries. The appellant has

alleged that the official gunners, who were travelling in the car

behind, not only did not intervene or retaliate to save Raju Pal

but  had  abandoned  their  vehicle.  She  has  alleged  that

reportedly,  a  conspiracy  was hatched in this  regard,  at  the

political  level  in  connivance  with  the  top  police  officers

including the Station Officer, Dhoomanganj, Shri Parshuram,

C.O. (Police),  Civil  Lines who were then present at the spot

Page 7

7

alongwith Superintendent of Police (City) & Deputy Inspector

General   of  Police,  Allahabad and Atiqe Ahmad, respondent

No. 4.   

8. The appellant has stated as well that the assailants who

were in  three different  vehicles,  left  the site  of  the  incident

after resorting to indiscriminate firing, whereupon the persons

present along with the supporters of the injured took Raju Pal

out  of  the  car  and  tried  to  rush  to  the  hospital  in  a

three-wheeler.  The appellant has mentioned that as per the

account of the eyewitnesses present and as reported by the

media, the assailants returned and opened indiscriminate fire

on Raju Pal from a close range so as to ensure that he was

dead.  That a third attack was made on the injured Raju Pal

from a point plank range before he could reach the hospital,

where  he  succumbed  to  his  injuries,  has  been  stated  in

categorical  terms.  According  to  the  appellant,  though  there

were four police stations on the route to the hospital, no police

officer  did  respond  or  offer  to  help  the  injured  or  his

companions in their last minute bid to save their lives.

Page 8

8

9. The  appellant  on  the  very  same  date  i.e.  25.01.2005

filed  the  FIR  at  4.30  P.M.,  narrating  the  incident  and  also

mentioning clearly, the involvement of the respondent No. 4 as

the brain behind the murder and that the respondent No. 5

had  shot  Raju  Pal  in  the  head.  The  FIR  was  registered  as

31/2005  dated  25.01.2005  of  Dhoomanganj  Police  Station,

Allahabad, U.P. under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 120B

IPC.  

10. The incident received rave media coverage as would be

evident from the following extract of a news item of the daily

“Times of India”:  (para No. 21of Writ Petition)

“Eyewitnesses  said  the  assailants,  who  were about two dozen in numbers, came in two Tata sumos and opened indiscriminate fire when the MLA’s  vehicle  reached  the  Chaufatka  petrol pump. Pal, who was in the driver’s seat, was hit several times in the neck, chest and stomach. His supporters immediately put him in an auto and  rushed  him  to  a  private  nursing  home  in Rain  Bagh  area.  The  assailants,  however, continued firing even on the auto to ensure his death.  At  the  Fire  Brigade  crossing,  the assailants again opened fire.  Just after reaching the hospital, Pal succumbed to his injuries. Two police gunners of Pal reportedly escaped from the scene.

Page 9

9

Though the assailants kept on shooting at Pal on the  entire  stretch  between  Chaufatka  and  the nursing  home  covering  four  police  stations  of Dhoomangang,  Cantt.  Civil  Lines  and  Kotwali, the police failed to react.”

11. The appellant has further stated that the body of Raju

Pal  was  thereafter  taken  into  custody  by  deploying  heavy

police force and thereafter a show of the post mortem  was

done hurriedly & secretly at the Swaroop Rani Nehru Hospital

at about 03.15 A.M. in the morning of 25-26/01/2005 without

any information to the appellant or any family member and in

total  violation  of  all  norms  pertaining  to  autopsy.  The

appellant has stated that purposefully in order to ensure that

the prosecution case is rendered weak, the injuries indicated

in the postmortem report were described in a manner to be

rendered doubtful to have been caused by the two weapons

recovered i.e.,  one DBBL Gun and one 30 Spring Rifle. The

appellant  has  thus  stated  that  the  charge-sheet  that  was

eventually  submitted  was  merely  an  eye-wash  to  save  the

respondent Nos. 4, 5 and their accomplices on one hand and

to rule out the possibility of further investigation by the CBI

and in the process hush up the true facts.  According to her,

Page 10

10

the dead body of the Raju Pal was thereafter cremated in the

early  morning  of  26.01.2005 at  Daraganj  crematorium,  but

neither prior thereto, it was handed to the appellant nor the

ashes were made available to her.   As a matter of  fact,  the

dead  body  was  cremated  as  if  it  was  an  unclaimed  body

though the deceased was a sitting Member of the Legislative

Assembly of the State and his identity was well known to all

concerned including the police.   

12.    Even the representation made by the mother of Raju

Pal on 26.01.2005 to the Senior Superintendent of Police to

hand over the dead body of her son to her for final rites was

not heeded too. All fervent requests and appeals made by her

in this regard failed. The appellant has alleged that not only

she as a widow was given a chance to have a parting glance of

the body of her husband, the dead bodies were disposed of

hurriedly  without  any notice  to  her  as well  as  other  family

members of Raju Pal presumably to wipe off all possible clues

in support of the heinous crime. The appellant was married to

Page 11

11

the deceased Raju Pal only on 16.1.2005 i.e. hardly a week

before the tragic incident.   

13. The appellant has stated as well that having regard to the

perceived  involvement  of  the  state  administration  and   the

police in particular, in the perpetration of the crime and their

passive and indifferent disposition in taking steps as required

in  law,   it  was  felt  by  all  right  minded  quarters  that

investigation  by  the  C.B.I.  was  indispensably  warranted  to

unearth the diabolic plot and identify the persons involved, so

as to ensure an impartial and meaningful enquiry for justice.

In spite of repeated representations, though submitted by the

appellant  herself  and  the  then  President  of  the  BSP,  U.P.

before the Governor, Chief Minister, Chief Secretary etc. of the

State  expressing  in  clear  terms  that  no  impartial  and

dispassionate  probe by  the  state  police  was possible  in  the

facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the

persons involved, and that the exercise ought to be handed

over to the C.B.I., the same did not meet with any favourable

response.

Page 12

12

14. Instead,  as  asserted  by  the  appellant,  by  way  of

retaliation to the public outcry against the ruthless and savage

assassination of  Raju Pal and his two associates, the police

authorities went  berserk in the entire city and they forcibly

trespassed  into  the  houses  of  such  residents,  mercilessly

assaulted them, including old women and children, ransacked

their belongings and threatened and intimidated them of dire

consequences if they did not refrain from their agitation for a

C.B.I. inquiry.  This high handed action of the police force also

received media coverage, both print and electronic.  The writ

petition further discloses that for reasons unfathomable, the

investigation of  the incident was soon thereafter  transferred

from Station House Officer, Dhoomanganj to a Police Inspector

posted in another police station, in violation of the G.O. No.

DG-7-S (253)/198 dated 21.03.2000.   

15. While  mentioning  that  with  the  installation  of  the

Samajwadi  Party  in  power,  there  was  an  upsurge  in  the

crimes,  the  appellant  has  referred  as  well  to  the  criminal

antecedents of the respondent No. 5, tracing back to the year

Page 13

13

1979,  when he was  accused of  murdering  a  contractor  in

Bihar.  According to her, this respondent has been booked in a

number of cases under Sections 302 and 307 IPC as well as

amongst others, under the Gangster Act, National Security Act

and  had been identified also as a member of the interstate

gang in December 2002.  Accusing the State Government,  the

above notwithstanding, of bestowing its generosity on him as

well as his brother, the appellant has also referred to a list of

20 criminal cases registered against the respondent No. 5 in

which efforts were being made to withdraw the same.  The list

of cases, as set-out in the writ petition involves offences inter

alia, under Sections 302, 307, 149, 120B IPC as well as under

the  Arms  Act  and  Gangster  Act.   The  appellant  has  been

candid enough to state in no uncertain terms, that though the

evidence was galore against the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and

their  accomplices  in  the  commission  of  murder  of  her

husband, conscious and intentional steps were taken by the

state administration and the police to shield them therefrom

due  to  political  and  other  influence  wielded  by  them.   In

endorsement of this accusation, the appellant has referred to

Page 14

14

as  well  some  excerpts  from  the  writ  petition  filed  by  the

Station  House  Officer  Shri  Parshuram  Singh  in  Civil  Writ

Petition  No.  34265/2005  challenging  his  suspension.  This

police officer who was in-charge of the investigation of incident

made serious allegations against the senior police officers in

their attempt to efface evidence against the respondent Nos. 4,

5 and their henchmen in the following terms: (page No. 126 of

Writ Petition)

“25  -That,  on  27.01.2005,  one  of  the  main accused Ashraf alias Khalid Azim was arrested in Lucknow and brought to Allahabad in tight security two other accused were also arrested by  the  petitioner  on  30.01.2005,  namely Farhan Ahmed and Ranjeet  Pal  and a  DBBL Gun  and  life  cartridges  were  recovered  from their possession. True photo and typed copy of the F.I.R.  and Recovery Memo are collectively enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure-5, to this writ petition.

26 -   That,  the respondent No.  2,  Shri  Sunil Kumar  Gupta,  S.S.P.,  Allahabad,  because  of the reason better known to him, he told to the petitioner the empty cartridge of  thirty spring rifle not be shown in the G.D. but the petitioner refused to do so.  The respondent No.  2,  Shri Sunil  Kumar  Gupta,  S.S.P.,  Allahabad,  also told to the petitioner that Ashraf and Atiqe not be made main accused in the case crime No.

Page 15

15

34/05,  Police  Station,  Dhoomanganj, Allahabad.

27 -  That, on 30.01.2005, on the day of arrest of  Farhan  Ahmed  and  Ranjeet  Pal,  the respondent  No.  2,  Shri  Sunil  Kumar  Gupta, S.S.P.,  Allahabad,  told to the petitioner  these two accused be  kept  in  curtain  (Baparda)  do not  produce  the  accused  before  media,  the petitioner  denied  as  the  accused  persons  are local  resident  and  they  are  publicly  known criminals therefore, no meaning to put them in curtain.

28-That,  the  respondent  No.  2,  Shri  Sunil Kumar Gupta, S.S.P., Allahabad, also, told the petitioner,  the  DBBL Gun recovered from the possession of  Farhan Ahmed and Ranjeet Pal also be changed but the petitioner denied and showed the  same  DBBL  Gun  in  the  records which was recovered from their possession.

29  -That,  the  respondent  No.  2,  Shri  Sunil Kumar Gupta, S.S.P., Allahabad, has motive to save the main accused Ashraf and Atiqe Ahmed from the charge of murder of M.L.A, Raju Pal. The  respondent  No.  2,  Shri  Sunil  Kumar Gupta,  S.S.P.,  Allahabad,  handled  by  the political leaders of the ruling Samajwadi party and he was doing in the manner for tempering the  evidence  of  the  murder  against  the  main accused Ashraf and Atiqe Ahmed as directed by leaders of ruling Samajwadi Party.

30-  But  the  respondent  No.  2,  Shri  Sunil Kumar  Gupta,  S.S.P.,  Allahabad,  suspended the  petitioner  in  the  evening  of  30.1.2005, alleging  that  the  murder  of  Raju  Pal  was occurred  and  he  could  not  control  the

Page 16

16

disturbances after  the murder of  M.L.A.  Raju Pal.

31  -That,  the  respondent  No.  2,  Shri  Sunil Kumar Gupta, S.S.P., Allahabad suspended the petitioner to help the accused persons as the respondent  No.  2,  Shri  Sunil  Gupta,  S.S.P., Allahabad,  several  times  told  to  change  the facts that shows the interest of respondent No. 2, Shri Sunil Kumar Gupta, S.S.P., Allahabad, in saving accused persons.

32-That, in as much as the investigation which was  being  carried  out  by  the  petitioner  was transferred  to  one  Inspector,  Police  Station Colonelganj Inspector Surendra Singh.

33-  That,  the  one  of  the  main accused Atiqe Ahmed,  Member  of  Parliament  now  was released on bail and he mounted pressure on respondent  No.  2,  Shri  Sunil  Kumar  Gupta, S.S.P.,  Allahabad,  for  transferring  the Investigation Officer Inspector Surendra Singh and transferring the petitioner any other place ahead from Allahabad.

34- That, the Respondent No. 2, wrote a D.O. letter  on  15.04.2005,  to  D.I.G.  Range,  for transferring  the  petitioner  under  suspension from District  Allahabad  to  any  other  district, the respondent No. 2, Shri Sunil Kumar, S.S.P., Allahabad,  recommended  transfer  of  the petitioner  in  the  pressure  of  Atiqe  Ahmed, Member of Parliament who is one of the main accused in the murder of M.L.A. Raju Pal. True photo and typed copy of the D.O. letter dated 15.04.2005,  of  respondent  No.  2,  is  enclosed herewith  and  marked  as  Annexure–6  to  this writ petition.

Page 17

17

  35- That,  the  Colonelganj  Inspector Surendra  Singh,  who  was  the  Investigating Officer in this case, was suddenly relieved of all the  responsibilities  and  has  been  posted  to Jhansi.  At  the  same time,  efforts  were  on to ensure  the  removal  of  Dhoomanganj  Station Officer  the  petitioner  around  the  time  of  the murder  and  get  him  posted  to  some  other district.  The  only  fault  of  both  these Investigating  Officers  was  that  they  did  not succumb  to  the  pressure  exerted  by  their superiors  and  went  ahead  with  the investigation in the right manner _ _ _ _

According  to  sources,  some  senior  police officers of the district were putting pressure on the Investigating Officer to replace the gun with some  other  weapon.  But  the  investigator  did not  relent  and forwarded the recovered pistol and  the  gun  for  a  forensic  test.  The  tests revealed that two of the six empty cartridges, also found at the scene of crime, had been fired from the  recovered  DBBL Gun.  All  along  the course of the investigation, some senior police officers  had  been  making  efforts  to  persuade the  investigator  to  shift  the  focus  of  his investigation  from  the  named  accused Samajwadi  Party  Member  of  Parliament  Atiqe Ahmed and his brother Ashraf, and bring into focus  the  personal  enmity  angle of  the  slain M.L.A. as the cause behind his murder.  The fact that the police officers of the district were working  under  tremendous political  pressure was  evident  from  the  way  they  had  been working.”

Page 18

18

16. On the basis of  these foundational  facts,  the appellant

has prayed for an appropriate writ or a direction in the nature

of mandamus, directing the official respondents to entrust a

fresh investigation into the episode by the C.B.I.

17. As abovestated, the appellant had approached this Court

earlier, seeking its intervention for an appropriate direction for

investigation of the incident by the CBI.  This was, to reiterate,

as the appellant nursed a deep rooted impression, in view of

overwhelming sinister background and the sequence of events

culminating in the gruesome murder of her husband, that the

crime had been committed with the tacit support of the police

administration and covert approval of the authorities in power.

In  course  of  the  hearing  before  this  Court  in  the  earlier

proceedings  afore-mentioned  and registered as  Writ  Petition

(Crl.)  Nos.  118-119  of  2005,  the  learned  counsel  for  the

appellant sought to withdraw the same,  so as to enable her to

file an appropriate writ petition before the High Court seeking

the same relief.

Page 19

19

18. By order dated 03.05.2006, the prayer made was allowed,

requiring the appellant  to  file  the  writ  petition  as  proposed

before the High Court within a period of two weeks therefrom.

It was observed that if it was so done, till the disposal of the

writ  petition,  the  respondent  State  would provide necessary

security to the appellant and her mother-in-law (co-appellant

before this Court).  Further proceedings of the Trial Court were

ordered to remain stayed till the disposal of the writ petition if

filed within the period of two weeks as permitted and a request

was made to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible.

In  compliance  of  this  order  the  appellant  alone filed  a writ

petition which was registered as W.P.(Crl.)  No.6209 of  2006

within the time allowed.

19. While the Writ Petition was thus pending, by letter No.-

Home  (Police)  Section-11,  Lucknow

No.2169/6-Pu-11-7-06(writ)/2006  dated  15.05.2007

addressed to the Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Government

of  India,  New  Delhi,  the  State  Government  conveyed  its

decision to get the investigation of the case conducted through

Page 20

20

the CBI and requested that the steps be taken accordingly and

to keep the State Government apprised of the action taken.

The  consent  of  the  State  Government  as  required  under

Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946

to this effect was also appended to the said letter.  As the case

number was wrongly mentioned therein, correction to the said

effect  was  communicated  vide  letter

No.Home/Police/Section-11,  Lucknow

No.3636/6-Pu-11.05.06 (writ)/2005 dated 14.08.2007.

20. At this stage, in view of this development, a submission

was made on behalf of the State Government before the High

Court, bringing to its notice, the same.  Consequently by order

dated 11.07.2007, the High Court being of the view that the

relief sought for in the writ petition had been granted by the

State  Government  by  making  a  request  to  the  Central

Government to get the case investigated by the CBI, dismissed

the writ petition.

21. As the records would reveal,  the appellant on the very

same date i.e. 11.07.2007 filed an application for restoration

Page 21

21

of  the  writ  petition,  contending  principally  that  though  the

request had been made by the State Government, a decision in

affirmation  of  the  Central  Government,  agreeing  to  the

investigation  of  the  case  being  conducted  by  the  CBI  was

awaited  and thus  the  writ  petition  ought  not  to  have  been

dismissed  as  infructuous.   An  application  was  also  filed,

requesting  the  High  Court  to  list  the  writ  petition  for

appropriate orders.  As the order sheet of the writ proceedings

before  the  High  Court  would  disclose,  the  restoration

application  was  kept  pending,  awaiting  the  decision  of  the

Central Government on the request of the State Government.

The  Government  of  India,  Ministry  of  Personnel  and Public

Grievances  and  Pension  (Department  of  Personnel  and

Training) eventually, vide letter No.228/29/2007 - A.V.D Govt.

of India..….1212/PGS/MS/2008 dated 18.01.2008 declined to

get the case investigated by the CBI.  The contents of the letter

would  disclose  that  the  decision  conveyed  thereby  was

preceded  by  an  inquiry  said  to  have  been  made  by  the

concerned  Department  in  consultation  with  the  CBI.

Pendency of the writ petition filed by the appellant, seeking the

Page 22

22

same  relief  was  also  referred  to  as  a  consideration.  It  was

mentioned as well, that the State Government had not stated

any other reason to justify the investigation to be conducted

by the CBI.  According to the Central Government, the trial of

the case was pending, the proceedings whereof however have

been  stayed  by  the  High  Court  and  that  there  was  no

interstate  or  international  ramification of  the  case  so  as  to

warrant investigation thereof by the CBI.

22. In  the  wake  of  the  rejection  of  the  request  for

investigation of the case by the CBI, the appellant applied for

an  amendment  of  the  writ  petition,  by  incorporating  the

required facts  pertaining  to  the  process  related thereto  and

also prayed for the annulment of the letter dated 18.01.2008

of the Central Government.  In the facts pleaded to that effect,

she averred that during the trial, the respondent Nos. 4 & 5

had  threatened  the  eye  witnesses  and  did  impeach  the

decision of the Central Government disallowing the request for

investigation  of  the  case  by  the  CBI  as  mechanical  and

prompted by surmises and conjectures.  She did furnish as

Page 23

23

well, the particulars of the cases in which the respondent No.4

& 5 had been involved in kidnapping and abduction as well, as

elimination of witnesses who could otherwise withstand their

pressure  and  displayed  courage  to  disclose  the  truth  in

support  of  the  charge  leveled  against  them.  Following  the

refusal  of  the  Central  Government,  the  state  government,

however shifted the investigation to the CBCID and meanwhile

both the state police and CBCID have submitted chargesheets.

23. Be  that  as  it  may,  the  High  Court  eventually  by  the

impugned judgment and order has dismissed the writ petition.

It held the view that if the appellant was not satisfied with the

charge-sheet submitted by the Civil Police as well as the CB

CID  and  the  materials  collected  by  these  two  agencies  in

course of their separate and independent investigation, and is

also of the view that further investigation was required, or that

some  additional  evidence  was  to  be  collected,  she  was  at

liberty to file an application before the Magistrate concerned to

that effect so as to enable the trial court to pass appropriate

orders thereon.  It further held that so far as the adduction of

Page 24

24

additional evidence was concerned, the appellant would have

every opportunity to produce the same or ask therefor also by

making an appropriate application at the time of trial.  

24. Before adverting to the rival submissions, it would be apt

to notice the pleaded stand of the respondents in substance.

The state government  has admitted the incident in which the

appellant’s  husband  had  been  assassinated  on  25.01.2005

along with two others namely Sandeep Yadav and Devi Dayal

Pal in a shootout.  It has not disputed as well, the registration

of  the  information  of  the  said  incident  under  Sections

148/147/149/302/307  and  120B  of  the  IPC  against

respondents No. 4,5  and seven others at Dhoomganj Police

Station.  That  on  27.01.2005,  the  state  police  had  arrested

respondent Nos. 4 & 5 in connection of the incident has also

been admitted.  The state government  has placed on record,

that the state police on the completion of the investigation in

the case has submitted a charge-sheet on 08.04.2005 against

respondent Nos. 4,5  and 9 others together with a list of 27

witnesses.

Page 25

25

25. It  disclosed  as  well  that  after  the  submission  of  the

charge-sheet, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions

and was registered as Session Trial  No.24/2006 whereafter,

the  trial  had  begun  only  to  be  stayed  by  this  Court  on

03.05.2006 vide its  order to that  effect  passed in W.P.(Crl.)

No.118-119  filed  by  the  appellant  under  Article  32  of  the

Constitution of India.

26. It mentioned as well that during the pendency of the writ

petition, filed after the disposal of the proceedings before  this

Court,  the  state  government  had  accorded  its  sanction  for

investigation of this case by the CBI and the communication to

this  effect  was  forwarded  to  the  Ministry  of  Personnel,

Government of India.  That however the Government of India

refused to accede to the request, being of the view that it was

not a fit case for investigation for the CBI was stated as well.

27. According to the state government, on such refusal of the

Central  Government,  it  transferred  the  investigation  of  the

case to CB CID which after the completion of the investigation

submitted three charge-sheets on 10.01.2009, 04.04.2009 and

Page 26

26

24.12.2009, adding to the array of accused persons and also

the witnesses in support of the charge.

28. While stoutly denying the allegation of indifference and

apathy to secure an impartial and effective investigation and

instead a tacit support of the offending act,  it has asserted,

that  having  regard  to  the  constricted  scope  of  ordering

investigation of a case by the CBI, no such direction as sought

for is warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case.  It

has emphatically asserted that the said police as well as the

CBCID  had  conducted  proper  investigations  and  in  the

process, did not spare anyone found involved in the incident.

It has denied in emphatic terms, the involvement of the said

machinery  in  any  conspiracy,   its  support   thereto  and

intentional  distortions  in  the  investigation  to  bail  out  the

culprits of the offence.  It pleaded that the dead bodies had

been duly received by the concerned family members and that

cremations of Raju Pal was performed by the one of his first

cousins.   It  has  been  stated  as  well  that  the  postmortem

examination of Raju Pal was undertaken by a panel of doctors

Page 27

27

and that the allegations made by the appellant that the dead

body  of  her  husband  was  secretly  and  hastily  cremated

without handing over the same to his relations and that the

postmortem examination was deliberately skewed are palpable

falsehood.  It also denied the allegation of the appellant that

the  respondent  No.  4  had  sophisticated  firearms  including

AK-47 and AK-56 had been used in the incident.  It disclosed

as  well  that  at  the  time  of  his  death,  there  were  several

criminal  cases  registered  against  Raju  Pal  including  the

offence  of  murder  and attempt  to  murder  and that  he  had

many enemies who could have shared the motive to liquidate

him.  

29. The  respondent  No.  4  while  emphatically  denying  his

involvement  as  well  as  the  complicity  of  his  brother  in  the

incident,  in  substance  accused  the  appellant  of  falsely

implicating  them as  her  political  rivals  and  of  keeping  the

proceedings  pending  so  as  to  derive  political  mileage

therefrom.   He  alleged  as  well,  that  the  appellant  had

deliberately protracted the proceedings inter alia by omitting

Page 28

28

to take necessary steps so as to use the same to promote her

political  prospects riding on the sympathy wave induced by

the murder of her husband.   The answering respondent has

averred  that  thereby  the  appellant  has  been  successful  in

getting elected to the State Assembly for two successive terms.

It has been stated further that within a couple of days of the

formation  of  the  Government  in  the  State  by  the  Bahujan

Samaj Party, the State Government did refer the case to the

Central Government for investigation by the CBI and having

failed  in  its  endeavour  to  do  so,  they  took  a   conscious

decision to transfer the investigation thereof to the CBCID on

10.12.2008.  The answering respondent has emphasized that

the  appellant  has  neither  challenged  the  decision  of

transferring the investigation to CBCID nor the charge-sheets

submitted by the said agency on the completion of the said

investigation.   According   to  the answering  respondent,  the

appellant has also not pointed out any fault or deficiency in

the  investigation  conducted  by  the  CBCID  and  that   her

insistence  for  further  investigation or  reinvestigation by  the

CBI is wholly impermissible in law.  

Page 29

29

30. The  CBI  in  its  turn  while  reiterating  the  intervening

developments pertaining to the investigation conducted by the

State Police and the CBCID has pleaded that after a lapse of

10 years from the incident, no purpose would be served by any

investigation by it at this stage.  It has averred as well that the

case  does  not  involve  any  larger  public  interest  or  any

interstate  or  international  ramification.   That  it  is  already

overburdened with the investigation/inquiry of different cases

entrusted to it by various High Courts and this Court has been

mentioned.  It has asserted that having regard to the state of

law laid down by this court and the contingencies in which

investigation  by  the  CBI  is  called  for,  the  facts  and

circumstances of the case do not merit any such direction.

31.  In  the  above  contentious  premise,  Mr.  Sodhi  has

assiduously  argued, that the run up of facts leading to the

merciless  murder  of  the  appellant’s  husband,   the

conspicuous  impassive  response of  the  state  machinery   to

ensure  his  safety  and  security  as  well  as  the  shoddy  and

purported  investigation  by  the  state  police  as  a  casual

Page 30

30

completion of routine formalities, warrant a fair and impartial

probe by the CBI.  The learned senior counsel has urged that

the onetime readiness of  the State Government to handover

the  investigation  to  the  CBI   unambiguously  reflects  its

satisfaction as well of such essentiality to espouse the cause of

even handed justice.  According to him, the rejection of the

request of the state government to this effect by the  Central

Government is wholly mechanical and without any application

of  mind  to  the  factors  relevant  and  germane  and  thus  the

decision to that effect is liable to be adjudged illegal, null and

void.   Not  only  at  the  point  of  time  when  the  Central

Government refused to accede to the request for investigation

by the CBI, the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant before the

High Court had been closed, there is nothing on record to even

suggest that  any independent endeavour had been made by

the Central Government to make a dispassionate evaluation of

the overall  facts thus rendering its decision arbitrary unfair

and  unjust.   Mr.  Sodhi  has  maintained  that  not  only  the

manner  in  which  the  daring  offence  was  committed  was

shocking  to  every  right  minded  person  of  the  society;  it

Page 31

31

signalled as well,  an apparent collapse of the administrative

machinery of a democracy committed to the solemn promise of

guaranteeing protection of life and liberty of its citizens.  The

learned  senior  counsel  argued  that  the  cruel  and  barbaric

crime having been committed in the broad day light in public

view,  there  are  still  several  eye-witnesses  available  who are

genuinely willing to testify about the same to bring the real

culprits to book and thus in the interest of fair and impartial

investigation and to obviate any possibility of miscarriage of

justice,  it  is  imperative  to  entrust  the  probe  to  the  CBI.

According to Mr. Sodhi, the testimony of the witnesses so far

examined  at  the  trial  clearly  demonstrate  their  hostile  and

non-cooperative  approach  which  per  se  suggests  that  they

must have been won over in between, leaving a bleak chance

for the prosecution to succeed.  This unmistakably affirms the

apprehension  of  the  appellant  vis-à-vis  quality  and

authenticity of the investigation undertaken by the state police

and the CBCID, he urged.  

Page 32

32

32. The  learned  senior  counsel  maintained  that  if  the

formalities of the trial with the materials so far collected in the

investigation are allowed to be completed being unmindful of

the consequences thereof, it would be a travesty of justice and

a servile  subjugation of  the  process  of  law to  the  minatory

reflexes  of  the  daring  and  audacious   violators  of  law.

Reiterating the imputations made in the writ petition vis-à-vis

the  role  of  the  state  instrumentalities  and  the  police  in

particular, as well as the culpability of respondent Nos. 4 & 5,

Mr. Sodhi has argued that entrustment of the investigation to

the CBI would not prejudice  the respondents in any manner

and that it would secure the obligatory requirement of a fair,

effective  and  impartial  inquisition,  more  particularly  when

witnesses of the incident are still  available,  but need to be

appropriately  identified,   interrogated  and  assured  of  their

safety to disclose the truth.  Mr. Sodhi has argued that it is a

fit case for the judiciary to intervene both in the individual as

well  as  social  perspectives  in  order  to  discourage  such

villainous  outrages  and  sustain  a  just  and  law  abiding

citizenry.   He  rested  his  submissions  on  the  following

Page 33

33

decisions:  Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh and Anr. vs. State

of Gujarat and Ors. (2004)4 SCC 158, State of West Bengal

and others  vs.  Committee  for  Protection  of  Democratic

Rights,  West  Bengal  and  others (2010)3  SCC  571,

Babubhai vs.  State of  Gujarat and others (2010)12 SCC

254, Mohd.  Hussain  alias  Julfikar  Ali  vs.  State

(Government of NCT of Delhi)   (2012)9 SCC 408,  Bharati

Tamang vs. Union of India and others  (2013)15 SCC 578.

33. Mr. Misra, learned senior counsel representing the State

not  only  dismissed  emphatically  the  allegations  of  tacit

involvement of the administration and the police in the design

and execution of the offence as alleged in order to  eliminate

the appellant’s husband, he argued as well, that the decision

to handover the investigation of the case to the CBI does not

only neuter such accusation, but also establish irrefutably the

bona fide of the state government.   

34. The learned senior counsel pointed out that in absence of

any  allegation  whatsoever  of  the  appellant  against  the

investigation conducted by the CBCID, her persistent requests

Page 34

34

for transferring the investigation to the CBI is fallacious and

unsustainable in law.  Mr. Misra has maintained that not only

the insistence  for the transfer of the investigation to the CBI,

in the face of successive probes made by the state police and

the  CBCID  is  uncalled  for  in  absence  of  any  deficiency  or

defect decipherable therein, it is impermissible  as well, at this

belated stage.   Mr. Misra has argued that even otherwise such

a transfer of investigation even if allowed, it would be fatal for

the prosecution as at this distant point of time not only the

witnesses  would  be  unavailable  and  even  if  available  they

would decline to testify.  The learned senior counsel has urged

as well that as the trial is pending and the respondent Nos. 4

& 5 and other  accused persons are  subjected thereto,  the

relief sought for by the appellant is prematured as well.   

35. Mr.  Goel  representing  respondent  Nos.  4  &  5  while

supplementing the assertions made on behalf of the State has

submitted  that  the  introduction  of  a  fresh  investigating

agency, at this stage  is not only impermissible in law but also

would have the potential  of  protracting the trial further, in

Page 35

35

violation of the fundamental right to life of his respondents as

guaranteed  by  Article  21  of  the  Constitution  of  India.

Reiterating  that  the  facts  do  not  demonstrate  a  faulty  or

incomplete  investigation  by  either  the  state  police  or  the

CBCID, the learned counsel has maintained that the appellant

has resorted to this delaying tactics to promote her election

prospects and political future.  While underlining that the writ

petition  filed  by  the  Investigating  Officer  Parsuram  Singh

alleging pressure on him by his higher ups to misdirect the

investigation,  has meanwhile  been dismissed on merits,  the

learned  senior  counsel  argued  that  the  averments  even  if

accepted to be true, did in fact  vouchsafe the fairness and

impartiality of the investigation conducted by the state police.

Mr.  Goel  has  urged  that  as  the  trial  is  pending,  any

intervention  of  this  Court  to  induct  another  investigating

agency on the basis of deductions made from the testimony of

hostile witnesses, would amount to unwarranted interference

with the trial which would be highly prejudicial to the parties.

Reiterating that the present initiative of the appellant is clearly

a political vendetta against the private respondents being her

Page 36

36

rivals, the learned counsel has asserted that there is neither

any exceptional circumstance nor any justifiable reason in law

to  direct  a  reinvestigation  by  the  CBI  when  the  trial  is

underway.  He dismissed the authorities cited on behalf of the

appellant  as  inapplicable  to  the  facts  of  the  case,  being

rendered in the textual facts disclosing vitiation of trials.  The

following decisions were cited to buttress the above pleas:

(i) State of West Bengal and others vs. Sampat Lal and

others (1985) 1 SCC 317;  (ii) Vineet  Narain  and  others  vs.  Union  of  India  and

another (1996) 2 SCC 199 (iii)  Union of India and others vs. Sushil Kumar Modi

and others  (1998) 8 SCC 661,  (iv) Common Cause,  A Registered Society   vs.  Unon of

India and others (1999)6SCC 667 (v) Secretary,  Minor  Irrigation  &  Rural  Engineering

Services, U.P. and Others vs. Sahngoo Ram Arya and

Anr.  (2002)5 SCC 521  (vi)  State of  West  Bengal  and Ors.  vs.  Committee for

Protection  of  Democratic  Rights,  West  Bengal  and

Ors.  (supra)  (vii)  Disha vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. (2011)13 SCC 337   

Page 37

37

(viii) K.V. Rajendran vs. Superintendent of Police, CBCID

South Zone, Chennai and Ors. (2013) 12 SCC 480 (ix) Hussainara Khatoon & others vs.  Home Secretary,

State of Bihar (1980)1 SCC 81 (x) Abdul  Rehman Antulay and others  vs.  R.S.  Nayak

and another (1992)1SCC 225 (xi) P.  Ramachandra  Rao  vs.  State  of  Karnataka

(2002)4SCC 578 (xii) Vakil Prasad Singh vs. State of Bihar (2009)3SCC 355 (xiii) Kashmeri Devi vs. Delhi Administration and another

1988 (Suppl.) SCC 482 (xiv) Gudalure M.J. Cherian and others vs. Union of India

and others (1992) 1 SCC 397 (xv) Punjab  and  Haryana  High  Court  Bar  Association,

Chandigarh  through  its  Secretary  vs.  State  of

Punjab and others (1994)1SCC 616 (xvi) Inder  Singh  vs.  State  of  Punjab  and  others

(1994)6SCC 275 (xvii) Rubabbuddin Sheikh vs. State of Gujarat  and others

(2010) 2 SCC 200

36. Ms. Mohana representing the Union of India endorsed its

decision of  not  entrusting  the  investigation  to  the  CBI  and

contended  that  the  facts  and  circumstances  did  not

convincibly  demonstrate  any  flaw  in  the  investigation

Page 38

38

undertaken by the state police or the CBCID.  In support of

this assertion, she relied upon the decisions of this Court in

Committee  for  Protection  of  Democratic  Rights  (supra),

K.  Saravanan  Karuppasamy  and  another  vs.  State  of

Tamil Nadu and Ors. (2014) (10) SCC 406, Sudipta Lenka

vs. State of Odisha and Others. (2014) 11 SCC 527.  

37. We have extended our anxious consideration to the

competing pleadings and the arguments advanced.  The gory

incident  in  which  the  appellant’s  husband  was  brutally

gunned  down  in  a  public  place  is  indeed  harrowing  and

alarmingly distressful.  Not only the daring act in the broad

day light is condemnable, it sent shock waves among the living

community, wrecking the temper and rhythm of social life and

created a fear psychosis and a scary feeling of lack of security

in all concerned.  It is a matter of record that at the relevant

time,  the  appellant’s  husband was a  sitting  member  of  the

State Legislative Assembly, having defeated the respondent No.

5, in the bye-elections held a few months prior to his murder.

That at that time, the respondent No. 4, brother of respondent

Page 39

39

No. 5 was a member of the Parliament is also an admitted fact.

In the FIR filed by the appellant soon after the incident, she

named the respondent No. 5 to be the assailant who had shot

Raju Pal in the head, being accompanied by others.  She has

alleged therein that respondent No. 4 was the brain behind the

operation and thus was involved in the conspiracy to eliminate

her husband.  As referred to hereinabove, it has been averred

by her as well that soon after the bye-elections in which her

husband  had  been  elected,  a  number  of  unsuccessful

attempts  had  been  made  on  him  for  which  he  genuinely

sustained an apprehension regarding his safety and security.

That he had repeatedly aired his apprehension to that effect

and had sought   remedial  measures  before  the  appropriate

authorities, has been pleaded as well.  Immediately after the

assassination  of  her  husband,  the  appellant  as  well  as  the

President of the Bahujan Samaj Party, to which he belonged,

also  had  submitted  a  spate  of  representations  before  the

Governor, Chief Minister, Chief Secretary and other authorities

of the State requesting for entrustment of the investigation of

the case to the CBI  as the state police, as perceived by them,

Page 40

40

was  found  to  be  patently  partisan  in  their  initiatives  and

approach  in  connection  therewith.   The  allegations  by  the

appellant  about laconical  autopsy of  the dead body without

any  notice  to  her   or  any  other  family  member  of  the

deceased, refusal to return the dead body to them and hasty

and secret cremation thereof to remove the otherwise tell tale

clues  to identify the assassins  have been candidly made. As

these  imputations  have  been  denied  by  the  respondents  in

their  pleadings,  we  refrain  from  further  dilating  thereon.

Similarly,  both  sides  have  also  alleged   registration  and

pendency of criminal cases against the appellant’s husband,

respondents No. 4 and 5 involving offences amongst others of

murder, attempt to murder etc.   

38. Noticeably,  however,  the  appellant   since  after  the

murder of her husband had been persistently  appealing  for

investigation  by  any  impartial  agency  i.e.  CBI,  expressing

without  reservation,  her  doubts  about  the  genuineness  and

bona fide of  the probe being conducted by the state  police.

She  has  even  alleged  the  involvement  of  the  state

Page 41

41

administration and the police in the conspiracy to eliminate

her husband and to have remained a mute and inert onlooker

at  the  time  of  and  after  the  open  diabolic  and  barbaric

assassination of her husband.  It is a matter of record that at

the time of the incident, the Samajwadi Party was in power.   

39. It was in this backdrop of events, that the appellant being

appalled and exasperated  by the perceived failure of the state

authorities  to   affirmatively   respond  to  her  request  for

entrusting  the  investigation  to  the  CBI  and  the  casual

measurers  of  the  state  police  in  that  regard  that  she

approached this Court with an application under Article 32 of

the  Constitution  of  India  for  its  remedial  intervention.   By

order dated 3.5.2006, however, this Court, as prayed for on

her behalf,   did permit her to file a writ  petition before the

High  Court  seeking  an  appropriate  writ  or  a  direction  for

transferring  the  investigation  of  the  case  to  the  CBI.   To

reiterate,  during the pendency of  the writ  petition that  was

filed within the time allowed by this Court, on 15.5.2007, the

State  Government  (by  then  the  Bahujan  Samaj  Party  had

Page 42

42

come to power) decided to hand over the investigation to the

CBI and communicated its decision to the Central Government

for  the  needful.   The  High  Court,  being  apprised  of  this

development, the writ petition was disposed of on 11.7.2007

as in its comprehension, the relief sought for by the appellant

had  been  granted  in  view  of  this  decision  of  the  state

government.  As the response of the Central Government was

awaited,  the  appellant  on  the  same  very  date  filed  an

application  for  restoration  of  the  writ  petition  and  as  the

records reveal, the said application was kept pending by the

High Court and after the refusal of the Central Government to

accede  to  the  request  made  by  the  state  government  on

18.1.2008, the writ petition was finally disposed of on merits

by the decision impugned hereunder.   

40. Though a period of seven years intervened, a perusal of

the  record  of  the  writ  proceedings,  however,  does  not

demonstrate any deliberate inaction or laches on the part of

the appellant to enter a finding of intentional delay on her part

Page 43

43

to  procrastinate  the  same for  extracting  any  benefit  to  her

therefrom.

41. This  Court,  while  disposing  of  the  earlier  writ  petition

being W.P. (Crl.) Nos. 118-119 of 2005 on 3.5.2006 had stayed

the trial of the case which by then had commenced following

the  submission  of  the  charge-sheet  by  the  state  police  on

8.4.2005. During the pendency of the writ petition before the

High Court and  consequent upon the refusal by the Central

Government  to  refer  the  investigation  to  the  CBI,  the  state

government  entrusted  the  exercise  to  CBCID,  which  on

completion  of  the  drill  submitted  three  charge-sheets  on

10.1.2009, 4.4.2009 and 24.12.2009.  A conjoint reading of

the charge-sheets submitted by the two investigating agencies

would thus reveal that along with respondent Nos. 4 and 5,

several other persons have been arraigned as accused adding

to the list of those challenged by the state police.  Further,

CBCID  has  also  added  to  the  list  of  witnesses  in  its

charge-sheets.  Corresponding to these final reports submitted

by  the  investigating  agencies,  Sessions  Trial  Case  Nos.

Page 44

44

13/2006, 14/2006, 15/2006 and 24/2006 are pending  for

analogous  trial,  the  proceedings  whereof  being  presently

stayed pursuant to the order dated  3.5.2006 of this Court in

W.P.  (Crl.)  Nos.  118-119 of  2005 and thereafter   the  order

dated 13.2.2015 passed in the present appeal.

42. In the course of the arguments, attention of this Court

has been drawn to the additional documents filed on behalf of

the appellant pertaining to the trial so far held and also the

parallel criminal cases registered  on the accusation of  threats

being extended to the  eye witnesses of  the  incident.   On a

cursory perusal of the testimony of witnesses so far examined

at the trial, it prima facie appears therefrom that though all of

them were present at that time at the spot when the offence

was  committed,  none  of  them  has  identified  the  accused

persons standing trial including the respondent Nos. 4 and 5

to be/or among the assailants.  Some of the witnesses, who

were also injured in the incident, after being declared hostile

by the prosecution, have even resiled  from their statements

under  Section  161  of  the  Code  made  before  the  police.

Page 45

45

Significantly,  however  the  witnesses  have  admitted  the

occurrence in which the appellant's husband had been shot

at,  following  which  he  had  succumbed  to  the  injuries

sustained.   

43. The  additional  documents  also  include  a  judgment

rendered by the trial court on 2.11.2011 in Sessions Trial No.

749 of 2009, State vs. Ram Chandra Yadav @ Fauji  registered

on the complaint  filed by one Mahendra Patel  @ Budhi  Lal

Patel, who in his cross-examination, retraced from the charge

levelled by him against respondent No. 4 and his companions

of having threatened and assaulted him so as to pressurize

him to change his statement made before the police, lest he

and his family be murdered.  The complainant Mahendra Patel

also was an eye witness to the incident of 25.1.2005 and had

been driving the Scorpio  vehicle which was following the one

in which Raju Pal was travelling.  The trial court acquitted the

accused mainly in view of the retraction of the statement of

the complainant and lack of evidence in support of the charge.

Having  regard to  the  present  stage  of  the  trial,  for  obvious

Page 46

46

reasons, we do not wish to offer any comment on any aspect

relatable  thereto. It is however noteworthy that some other

witnesses of the prosecution including the appellant are yet to

be examined by the prosecution.  

44. Be  that  as  it  may,  the  issue  that  demands  to  be

addressed is the necessity or otherwise of further investigation

or  reinvestigation by  the CBI in view of the overall conspectus

of facts and the state of law.  Admittedly, more than a decade

has elapsed in between, and in the interregnum, successive

investigations  have  been conducted by  the  state  police  and

CBCID,  following  which  four  charge-sheets  have  been

submitted arraigning  respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and others as

accused with the supporting material gathered in course of the

probe  to  prove  the  charge  levelled  against  them.   It  is

noticeable  as  well  that  the  appellant  as  well   has  not

highlighted  any  defect,  omission  or  deficiency  in  the

investigation  conducted  by  the  CBCID,  likely  to  adversely

impact upon the outcome of the trial therefor.  

Page 47

47

45. These notwithstanding, it would still be, in our opinion,

imperative to examine as to whether for doing complete justice

and  enforcing  the  fundamental  rights  guaranteed  by  the

Constitution, the relief of entrustment of the investigation of

the  case  again  to  the  CBI   is  grantable  or  not  on  its  own

merits.  This is chiefly, in view of the intrepid, audacious  and

fiendish intrusion  of  human right by the assassins in  broad

day light  at a public place, by defiantly violating all canons of

law  and  making  a  mockery  of  the  administrative   regime

entrusted  with  the  responsibility  to  maintain  an  orderly

society.   The  terrorising  impact  of  this  incident  and  the

barbaric manner of  execution of the offence is also a factor

which impels this Court to undertake such a scrutiny in the

interest of public safety, a paramount duty entrusted to all the

institutions of  governance of  our  democratic  polity.   This is

more so, where a grisly and intimidatory crime impacting upon

the public confidence in the justice delivery system as a whole

is involved, so as to ensure that such outrageous do not go

incautiously, unfathomed and unpunished.

Page 48

48

46. The authorities cited at the Bar present the precedential

spectrum  of  the  curial  jurisprudence  in  the  context  of

entrustment of investigation to an instrumentality other than

the local/state police agencies.   

47. In  Zahira  Habibulla  H.  Sheikh (supra),  commonly

adverted to as “Best Bakery Case”  on the theme, the aspects

of perfunctory and partisan role of the investigating agency as

well  as improper conduct of the trial involved by the public

prosecutor surfaced for scrutiny.  Though the trial was over

resulting in acquittal  of  the accused persons mainly  as the

purported eye-witnesses had resiled from the statements made

by them under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (hereinafter to be  referred

to as “the Code”) during the investigation coupled with faulty

and  biased  investigation  and  laconical  trial,  this  Court

responded to the request for a fresh trial made by the State

and one of the eye-witnesses, Zahira.  It was pleaded inter alia

that when a large number of witnesses have turned hostile, it

ought  to  raise  a  reasonable  suspicion that  they were being

threatened  or  coerced.   Apart  from  alleging  that  the

Page 49

49

prosecution did not take steps to protect the star witnesses, it

was  contended  as  well  that  the  trial  court  had  failed  to

exercise its power under Section 311 of the Code to recall and

reexamine them as their testimony was essential to unearth

the truth and record a just decision in the case.   

48. The casual decision of the public prosecutor to drop a

material witness, a measure approved by the trial court also

came to be criticized.   The lapse of  non-examination of  the

injured eye-witnesses, who were kept away from the trial, was

also highlighted.  It was alleged that the partisan  witnesses

had been examined to favour the accused persons resulting in

a denial of fair trial.

49. This  Court  in  the  above  disquieting  backdrop,  did

underline  that  discovery,  vindication  and  establishment  of

truth were the avowed purposes underlying the existence of

the courts of justice. Apart from indicating that the principles

of  a  fair  trial  permeate  the  common law  in  both  civil  and

criminal contexts,  this Court underscored the necessity of a

delicate  judicial  balancing  of  the  competing  interests  in  a

Page 50

50

criminal trial - the interests of the accused and the public and

to a great extent that too of the victim, at the same time not

losing the sight of public interest involved in the prosecution of

persons who commit offences.

50. It was propounded that in a criminal case, the fate of the

proceedings cannot always be left entirely in the hands of the

parties,  crimes being public wrongs in breach and violation of

public rights and duties,  which affect the whole community

and are harmful to the society in general.  That the concept of

fair  trial  entails  the  triangulation  of  the  interest  of  the

accused,  the  victim,   society  and  that  the  community  acts

through  the  state  and  the  prosecuting  agency  was

authoritatively stated.  This Court observed that the interests

of the society are not to be treated completely with disdain and

as  persona  non  grata.   It  was  remarked   as  well  that  due

administration  of  justice  is  always  viewed  as  a  continuous

process, not confined to the determination of a particular case

so much so that a court must cease to be a mute spectator

and a mere recording machine but become a participant in the

Page 51

51

trial  evincing  intelligence  and  active  interest  and  elicit  all

relevant  materials  necessary  for  reaching  the  correct

conclusion,  to find out the truth and administer justice with

fairness  and  impartiality  both  to  the  parties  and  to  the

community.   

51. While highlighting the courts’ overriding duty to maintain

public  confidence  in  the  administration  of  justice,  it  was

enunciated  as  well,  that  they  cannot  turn  a  blind  eye  to

vexatious and oppressive conduct,  discernable in relation to

the proceedings.  That the principles of rule of law and due

process  are  closely  linked  with  human  rights  protection,

guaranteeing a fair trial, primarily aimed at ascertaining the

truth, was stated. It was held as well, that the society at large

and the victims or their family members and relatives have an

inbuilt right to be dealt fairly in a criminal trial and the denial

thereof is as much injustice to the accused as to the victim

and  the  society.  Dwelling  upon  the  uncompromising

significance and the worth of witnesses in the perspective of a

Page 52

52

fair trial, the following revealing comments of Bentham were

extracted  in paragraph 41:

“41. “Witnesses”, as Bentham said: are the eyes and ears of justice.  Hence, the importance and primacy of the quality of trial process.  If the witness himself is  incapacitated  from  acting  as  eyes  and  ears  of justice, the trial gets putrefied and paralysed, and it no  longer  can  constitute  a  fair  trial.  The incapacitation may be due to several factors like the witness being not in a position for reasons beyond control  to  speak the truth in the court or  due to negligence or ignorance or some corrupt collusion. Time  has  become  ripe  to  act  on  account  of numerous experiences faced by courts on account of  frequent  turning  of  witnesses  as hostile,  either due  to  threats,  coercion,  lures  and  monetary considerations  at  the  instance  of  those  in  power, their  henchmen and hirelings,  political  count  and patronage and innumerable other corrupt practices ingeniously adopted to smother and stifle truth and realities coming out to surface rendering truth and justice  to  become  ultimate  causalities.  Broader public and societal interests require that the victims of  the  crime  who  are  not  ordinarily  parties  to prosecution and the interests of  State represented by their prosecuting agencies do not suffer even in slot process but irreversibly and irretrievably, which if  allowed  would  undermine  and destroy public confidence  in  the  administration of  justice,  which may  ultimately  pave  way  for  anarchy,  oppression and injustice resulting in complete breakdown and collapse of the edifice of rule of law, enshrined and jealously  guarded  and  protected  by  the Constitution.  There comes the need for protecting the  witness.   Time  has  come  when  serious  and undiluted  thoughts  are  to  be  bestowed  for

Page 53

53

protecting  witnesses  so  that  ultimate  truth  is presented before the court and justice triumphs and that  the  trial  is  not  reduced  to  a  mockery.   The State  has a definite role to play in protecting the witnesses, to start with at least in sensitive cases involving  those  in  power,  who  have  political patronage  and  could  wield  muscle  and  money power, to avert the trial getting tainted and derailed and truth becoming a causality.  As a protector of its citizens it  has to ensure that during a trial  in court  the  witness  could  safely  depose  the  truth without any fear of being haunted by those against whom he has deposed.”

52. It  was  underlined that  if  ultimately  the  truth is  to  be

arrived at, the eyes and ears of justice have to be protected so

that  the  interest  of  justice  do  not  get  incapacitated  in  the

sense of making the proceedings before the courts, mere mock

trials.   While  elucidating  that  a  court  ought  to  exercise  its

powers under Section 311 of the Code and Section 165 of the

Evidence Act judicially and with circumspection, it was held

that such invocation ought to be only to subserve the cause of

justice and the public interest by eliciting evidence in aid of a

just decision and to uphold the truth.  It was proclaimed that

though justice is depicted to be blindfolded, it is only a veil not

to see who the party before it is, while pronouncing judgment

Page 54

54

on  the  cause  brought  before  it  by  enforcing  the  law  and

administer justice and not to ignore or turn the attention away

from the truth of the cause or the lis before it, in disregard of

its  duty  to  prevent  miscarriage  of  justice.  That  any

indifference,  inaction or lethargy displayed in protecting the

right  of  an  ordinary  citizen,  more  particularly  when  a

grievance  is  expressed  against  the  mighty  administration,

would  erode  the  public  faith  in  the  judicial  system  was

underlined.   It  was  highlighted  that  the  courts  exist  to  do

justice  to  the  persons  who  are  affected  and  therefore  they

cannot afford to get swayed by the abstract technicalities and

close  their  eyes  to  the  factors  which  need  to  be  positively

probed and noticed.  The following statement in Jennison vs.

Baker, (1972) 1 All ER 997 was recalled:  

“The law should not be seen to sit by limply, while those who defy it go free, and those who seek its protection lose hope.”   

53. It was declared that the courts have to ensure that the

accused  persons  are  punished  and  that  the  might  or  the

authority  of  the state  is  not  used to shield themselves and

Page 55

55

their  men and it  should be ensured that  they do not  wield

such powers,  which under  the  Constitution  has  to  be  held

only in trust for the public and society at large.  That if any

deficiency in investigation or prosecution is visible or can be

perceived  by  lifting  the  veil  covering  such  deficiency,  the

courts  have  to  deal  with  the  same  with  an  iron  hand

appropriately within the framework of law was underlined.   

54. Referring  to  its  earlier  decision  in  Karnel  Singh  vs.

State of M.P. (1995) 5 SCC 518, it was reiterated that in a

case  of  a  defective  investigation,  the  court  has  to  be

circumspect in evaluating the evidence and may have to adopt

an active and analytical role to ensure that truth is found by

having recourse to Section 311 of the Code  or at a later stage

also resorting to Section 391 instead of throwing hands in the

air  in  despair.   It  recalled as well  its  observations  in  Ram

Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar & others, (1998) 4 SCC 517

that the courts are installed for justice oriented mission and

thus if a negligent investigation or omissions or lapses due to

perfunctory investigation are not effectively rectified, the faith

Page 56

56

and  confidence  of  the  people  would  be  shaken  in  the  law

enforcing  agency  and  also  in  the  institution  devised  for

administration of justice.

55. Though, as referred to hereinabove, trial was completed

and the accused persons were acquitted, in the textual facts,

this Court did direct retrial as prayed for, to avoid subversion

of  the  justice  delivery  system and ordered  the  investigating

agency or those supervising the investigation to act in terms of

Section  173(8)  of  the  Code  as  the  circumstances  would  so

warrant.

56. The observations and the propositions, though made in

the backdrop of a request for retrial, those pertaining to the

essentiality of  a fair  and complete investigation and trial  as

well  as  the  solemn  duty  of  the  courts  to  ensure  the

discernment  of  truth  to  administer  even  handed  justice  as

institutions of trust of public faith and confidence, are in our

estimate,  of  universal  application  and  binding  effect,

transcending  the  factual  settings  of  a  case.   An  adverse

deduction  vis-à-vis  the  quality  of  investigation  and/a  trial

Page 57

57

trivializing  the  cause  of  justice,  is  however  the  essential

pre-requisite, for such remedial intervention by way of further

investigation,  reinvestigation,  additional  evidence, retrial  etc.

to be made objectively but assuredly for the furtherance of the

salutary  objectives  of  the  justice  dispensing  system  as

contemplated in law, it being of paramount pre-eminence.  

57. This Court  in  Mohd. Hussain @ Julifikar Ali (supra)

was also seized of a situation imploring for a retrial following

the termination of the prosecution principally on account of

delay,  when juxtaposed  to  the  demand for  justice  in  cases

involving  grave  crimes  affecting  the  society  at  large.   The

offence involved was under Sections 302/307/120B IPC and

Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and

had  perpetrated  an  explosion  in  a  passenger  carrying  bus.

This Court amongst others recalled its observations in Kartar

Singh vs.  State  of  Punjab (1994)  3  SCC  569  that  while

dispensing justice, the courts should keep in mind not only

the liberty of the accused but also the interest of the victim

and  their  near  and  dear  ones  and  above  all  the  collective

Page 58

58

interest of the community and the safety of the nation, so that

the  public,  may  not  lose  faith  in  the  system  of  judicial

administration and indulge in private retribution.  It however

also took note of its ruling in State of M.P. vs. Bhooraji and

others  (2001) 7 SCC 679 that a de novo trial should be the

last  resort  and that  too  only  when such a course  becomes

desperately  indispensable  and  should  be  limited  to  the

extreme exigency to avert a failure of justice.  It noted with

approval  the  observation  in  P.  Ramachandra  Rao  (supra)

that  it  is  neither  advisable  nor  feasible  nor  judicially

permissible to draw or prescribe an outer limit for conclusion

of all criminal proceedings and that the criminal courts are not

obliged to terminate the trial or criminal proceedings merely

on account of lapse of time.  That such time limits cannot and

will  not  by themselves be treated by any court as a bar to

further continuance of the trial or proceedings or to terminate

the  same  and  acquit  or  discharge  the  accused,   was

emphatically  underlined.  Reference  too  was  made  of  the

decision in Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh (supra).

Page 59

59

58. Vis-à-vis the notions  of ‘speedy trial’ and ‘fair trial’ as the

integral constituents of Article 21 of the Constitution of India,

it was observed that there was a qualitative difference between

the right to speedy trial and the right of the accused to fair

trial.  While pointing out that unlike the accused’s right of fair

trial, the deprivation of the right to speedy trial does not per se

prejudice the accused in defending himself, it was proclaimed

that mere lapse of several years since the commencement of

prosecution by itself, would not justify the discontinuance of

prosecution or dismissal of the indictment. It was stated in no

uncertain  terms,  that  the  factors  concerning  the  accused’s

right to speedy trial have to be counterpoised with the impact

of the crime on the society and the confidence of the people in

the judicial  system.  It  was noted that  speedy trial  secures

rights  to an accused but it  does not  preclude the rights  of

public justice.  It was exposited that the nature and gravity of

the crime, persons involved, social impact and societal needs

must be weighed along with the right of the accused to speedy

trial and if the balance tilts in favour of the former, the long

delay  in  conclusion  of  trial  should  not  operate  against  the

Page 60

60

continuation of the prosecution but if the right of the accused

in the facts and circumstances of the case and the exigencies

or situation leans the balance in his favour, the prosecution

may be brought to end.  It was held that the guiding factor for

a retrial essentially has to be the demand of justice.  It was

emphasized that while protecting the right of an accused to

fair trial and due process of law, the interest of the public at

large who seek protection of law ought not  to be altogether

overlooked so much so, that it results in loss of hope in the

legal system. Retrial in the facts of the case was ordered.

59. The content and scope of the power under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India to direct investigation by the CBI in a

cognizable  offence,  alleged  to  have  taken  place  within  the

territorial jurisdiction of the State, without the consent of the

State Government fell for scrutiny of this Court in Committee

for Protection of Democratic Rights (supra).  

60. While examining the issue in the context of the power of

judicial review as embedded in the constitutional scheme, it

was held that no Act of Parliament could exclude or curtail the

Page 61

61

powers of the constitutional courts in that regard.  Reiterating,

that  the power of  judicial  review,  is  an integral  part  of  the

basic structure of the Constitution, it was underlined that the

same  was  essential  to  give  a  pragmatic  content  to  the

objectives of the Constitution embodied in Part III and other

parts thereof.  In elaboration, it was held that Article 21 of the

Constitution not only takes within its fold, the enforcement of

the rights of the accused but also the rights of the victim.  It

was predicated that the State has a duty to enforce the human

rights  of  the  citizens  providing  for  fair  and  impartial

investigation,  against  any  person accused  of  commission of

any cognizable  offence.   Referring to Section 6 of  the Delhi

Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, it was ruled that any

restriction imposed thereby could not be construed to be one

on the powers of the constitutional courts and thus cannot be

taken away or curtailed or diluted thereby.  While proclaiming

the supervening powers of the High Court under Article 226 of

the  Constitution  of  India  to  direct,  entrustment  of  the

investigation to the CBI  as in the case involved,  this  Court

sounded  a  caveat  as  well  that  the  very  plentitude  of  such

Page 62

62

power inheres a great caution in its exercise and though no

inflexible guidelines can be laid down in that regard, the same

has  to  be  invoked  sparingly,  cautiously  and  in  exceptional

situation when it becomes necessary to provide credibility and

to instill confidence in the investigation or where the incident

may have  national  and international  ramifications  or  where

such an order  may be necessary for  doing complete  justice

and enforcing the fundamental rights. (emphasis supplied)

61. The facts in  Bharati Tamang (supra) seeking de novo

investigation,  present  somewhat  an  identical  fact  situation.

The  appellant’s  husband,  President  of  a  political  party  was

brutally murdered in public view and in the presence of police

and security personnel  by the supporters of  the rival party.

The investigation into the sordid incident had been completed.

Alleging that the probe initially held by the state police and

thereafter by the CID and by the CBI were faulty, the prayer

for de novo inquisition was made.  Imputation of attempts by

the prosecution to suppress the truth in spite of the fact that

the assailants were identified and named in the FIR and that

Page 63

63

the incident was in effectuation of a deep rooted conspiracy

and preceded by previous threats were made.  The CBI in its

pleadings, inter alia, cited,

(i) prevailing law and order situation in the town; (ii) abscondence of most of the accused persons;  (iii) murder of  its informants; (iv) fear psychosis in the locality and resultant want of

support from the local public  as  hindrances to its investigation.  

62. On  behalf  of  the  appellant,  accusation  of  tardy

prosecution of the case, and free and open movement of the

key accused persons in the city avoiding arrest were made as

well.   The  plea  of  the  impleaded  accused  persons  that  the

appellant  after  the demise of  her  husband had initiated the

writ  proceedings  for  political  gain  was  rejected.   Their

contention based on Section 319 of the Code that in course of

the trial, on availability of sufficient evidence, any person not

being  an  accused  could  be  ordered  to  be  tried,  was  also

negated.  The propositions expounded in Zahira Habibulla H.

Sheikh (supra)  qua  the  duty  of  the  court  to  ensure  fair

investigation by remedying the deficiencies and defaults therein

Page 64

64

so  as  to  bring  forth  full  and  material  facts  to  prevent

miscarriage of  justice  were reiterated.  It  was concluded that

when  the  courts  find  extra  ordinary  or  exceptional

circumstances  rendering  reinvestigation  imperative,  in  such

eventualities even de novo investigation can be ordered.  While

ruling that in case of discernable deficiency in investigation or

prosecution, the courts have to deal with the same with iron

hand  appropriately  with  the  framework  of  law,  it  was

underlined that in appropriate cases even, if charge-sheet was

filed, it  was open for the High Court and also this Court to

direct investigation of the case to be handed over to CBI or to

any other agency or to direct investigation de novo in order to

do complete justice, in the facts of the case.

63. Noticing that  certain transcripts of  some conversations

relating to the incident intercepted by the CBI were awaiting

analysis by the forensic agency as a part of the investigation,

this  Court  in  the  ultimate,  transferred  the  case  beyond the

territorial limits of the district involved and directed that the

probe be carried out by the CBI to be monitored by its Joint

Page 65

65

Director as named.  It was ordered that the CBI would ensure

that  all  required  evidence  is  gathered  by  leaving  no  stone

unturned,  so  that  all  accused  involved  in  the  offence  are

brought for trial to be dealt with in accordance with law.  The

trial  that  had  meanwhile  commenced was  kept  in  abeyance

pending conclusion of the further investigation by the CBI and

the  submission  of  report  before  the  transferred  court  as

ordered.   Not  only  in  issuing  these  directions  this  Court

revisited the imperatives bearing on the duty of the Court  to

ensure that criminal prosecution is carried out effectively and

the   perpetrators  of  the  crime  are  duly  punished  by  the

appropriate court of law, it noticed as well some of the factual

features of the case  namely;  

(i i The deceased at his death was the President of a

political party. (iii There was a deep rooted rivalry between his party

and another party. (iiii The deceased had organized a meeting of his party

on the date of the incident.

Page 66

66

(ivi Police personnel were present at the place of the

occurrence.  Though  present,  no  report  thereof

was registered immediately thereafter.  (vi Wide coverage of the incident by the media. (viiAvailability  of  the  transcripts  of  the  intercepted

conversations of some of the accused persons and

the office bearers of the rival political party.

64. This  Court  in  Babubhai (supra)  while  examining  the

scope of Section 173(8) of the Code, did recall its observations

in Manu Sharma vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2010) 6 SCC 1,

that it is not only the responsibility of the investigating agency

but as well as of the courts to ensure, that investigation is fair

and does not in any way hamper the freedom of an individual

except in accordance with law.  It underlined, that the equally

enforceable canon of  criminal law is that high responsibility

lies  upon  the  investigating  agency,  not  to  conduct  an

investigation in a tainted and unfair manner and that such a

drill should not prima facie be indicative of a biased mind and

every effort should be made to bring the guilty to law de hors

his  position  and  influence  in  the  society  as  nobody  stands

Page 67

67

above law.  It propounded that the word “ordinarily” applied

under  Section  173(8)  of  the  Code,  did  attest  that  if  the

investigation  is  unfair  and  deliberately  incomplete  and  has

been done in a manner with an object of helping a party, the

court may direct normally for further investigation, and not for

reinvestigation. It was however added as a sequiter  that in

exceptional circumstances, the court in order to prevent the

miscarriage  of  criminal  justice,  and  if  it  is  considered

necessary, may direct for de novo investigation as well.  It was

observed that if an investigation has not been conducted fairly,

the resultant charge sheet would be invalid.  It was held as

well,  that such investigation would ultimately prove to be a

precursor of miscarriage of criminal justice and the court in

such a contingency would be left to guess or conjecture, as the

whole truth would not be forthcoming to it.  It was held that

fair  investigation  is  a  part  of  the  constitutional  rights

guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21 of  the Constitution of

India and thus the investigating agency cannot be permitted to

conduct an investigation in a tainted or biased manner.  It was

emphasised that  where  non-interference  of  the  court  would

Page 68

68

ultimately result in failure of justice, the court must interfere

and in the interest of justice choose an independent agency to

make a fresh investigation.   

65. In  Rubabbuddin  Sheikh (supra)  as  well,  though  as

many as eight action reports had been submitted by the state

police on the incident of reported murder of the brother of the

petitioner in a fake encounter and the disappearance of  his

sister-in-law  in  which,  amongst  other,  allegedly   the

anti-terrorist  squad  of  the  state  police  was  involved,  a

proceeding was initiated on the basis of a letter addressed to

the Chief Justice of India seeking a direction for investigation

by the CBI.  In view of the rival contentions advanced as to the

permissibility or otherwise of the transfer of the investigation

as prayed for, this Court on an in-depth audit of the decisions

rendered  by  it,  did  negate  the  plea that  subsequent  to  the

submission of a charge sheet, the court is not empowered in

any  case  whatsoever  to  handover  the  investigation  to  an

independent agency like CBI.  It was held, having regard to the

parameters  outlined  by  the  two  sets  of  authorities  on  the

Page 69

69

issue, that such a course however would be permissible in an

appropriate  case  where  the  facts  bearing  thereon  would

demonstrate lack of proper investigation and vitiations thereof

by  factual  discrepancies  endorsing  such  a  deduction.   The

aspect that accusations in the contextual facts were directed

against the local police personnel in which high police officials

of the state had been made accused also did weigh with the

determination.   The view taken in  Gudalure M.J.  Cherian

(supra)   that  though  ordinarily,  after  the  investigation  is

completed by the police and charge sheet is submitted to the

court,  the  investigation  ought  not  to  be  re-opened  by

entrusting  the  same  to  a  specialized  agency  like  CBI,

nevertheless in a given situation,  to do justice  between the

parties and to instill confidence in the public mind it may be

warranted,  was  noted  with  approval.   The  overriding

imperative of permitting  transfer of investigation to the CBI

was thus acknowledged to be in the advancement of the cause

of justice and to instill confidence in the mind of the victims as

well as the public.

Page 70

70

66. The  renderings  in  Hussainara Khatoon (supra), A.R.

Antulay (supra), P.  Ramachandra  Rao (supra),  Vakil

Prasad (supra), Sampat Lal  (supra), Babubhai  (supra) and

Common Cause  (supra)  have  been  pressed  into  service  on

behalf of the respondent Nos. 4 & 5 to highlight the demand of

speedy  trial  as  a  mandate  of  the  fundamental  right  to  life

guaranteed  under  Article  21  of  the  Constitution  of  India.

While emphasizing that speedy trial is  the essence of criminal

justice and any delay constitutes denial thereof,  it has been

propounded  therein,  that  any  procedure  which  does  not

ensure a  quick trial cannot be regarded as reasonable, fair or

just and would fly in the face of such cherished constitutional

promise.   While  observing  that  the  right  to  speedy  trial

encompasses  all  the  stages  namely;  investigation,  inquiry,

trial, appeal, revision and retrial, it was however noted in  P.

Ramachandra Rao (supra)  that  no guidelines for  a speedy

trial can be intended to be applied as hard rules or a straight

jacket formula and that their application would depend on the

fact  situation  of  each case,  which is  difficult  to  foresee,  so

much  so  that  no  generalization  can  be  made.   It  was

Page 71

71

expounded as well in  the Sampat Lal (supra) that  in spite of

the  procedure  laid  down  in  the  relevant  provisions  of  the

Criminal  Procedure  Code,  a  court,  in  a  given  case,  if  is

satisfied that the statutory agency has not functioned in an

effective way or that the circumstances are such that it may

reasonably be presumed or inferred that it may not be able to

conduct the investigation fairly or impartially, the court may

reasonably consider to supplement the procedure.   

67. While  recalling  its  observation in  State of  Bihar and

another  vs. JAC Saldanha and others (1980) 1 SCC 554,

that on a cognizance of the offence being taken by the court,

the police function of investigation comes to an end subject to

the provision contained in Section 173(8) of the Code and that

the  adjudicatory  function  of  the  judiciary  commences,  thus

delineating the well demarcated functions of crime detection

and  adjudication,   this  Court  did  recognize  a  residuary

jurisdiction  to  give  directions  to  the  investigating  agency,  if

satisfied that the requirements of law were not being complied

with  and  that  the  investigation  was  not  being  conducted

Page 72

72

properly or with due haste and promptitude.  It was reiterated

in  Babubhai (supra)  that  in  exceptional  circumstances,  the

court in order to prevent the miscarriage of criminal justice,

may  direct  investigation  de  novo,  if  it  is  satisfied  that

non-interference would ultimately result in failure of justice.

In such an eventuality endorsement of the investigation to an

independent  agency  to  make  a  fresh  probe  may  be  well

merited.  That not only fair trial but fair investigation is also a

part of the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 20

& 21 of the Constitution of India and therefore investigation

ought to be fair, transparent and judicious, was reemphasised.

The expression “ordinarily” as used in Section 173(8) of the

Code  was  noted  again  to  rule  that  in  exceptional

circumstances  however,  in  order  to  prevent  miscarriage  of

criminal justice, a court may still direct investigation de novo.

The above postulations being strikingly common in all these

decisions, do pervade the fabric and the content thereof and

thus dilation of individual facts has been avoided.

Page 73

73

68. That  the  extra-ordinary  power  of  the  constitutional

courts under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution of India

qua  the  issuance  of  direction  to  the  CBI  to  conduct

investigation  must  be  exercised  with  great  caution  was

underlined  in   Committee  for  Protection  of  Democractic

Rights  (supra) as  adverted  to  hereinabove.  Observing  that

although  no  inflexible  guidelines  can  be  laid  down  in  this

regard,   it  was  highlighted  that  such  an  order  cannot  be

passed as a matter of routine or merely because the party has

levelled some allegations against the local police and can be

invoked in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary

to provide credibility and instill confidence in investigation or

where  the  incident  may  have  national  and  international

ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for

doing  complete  justice  and  for  enforcing  the  fundamental

rights.

69. In  Kashmeri  Devi (supra),  being  satisfied,  in  the

prevailing facts and circumstances that effort had been made

to  protect  and  shield  the  guilty  officers  of  the  police  who

Page 74

74

allegedly had perpetrated the offence of murder involved, this

Court  directed  the  Magistrate  concerned  before  whom  the

charge sheet had been submitted, to exercise its power under

Section  173(8)  of  Code  to  direct  the  CBI  for  proper  and

thorough investigation of the case and to submit an additional

charge-sheet in accordance with law.

70. In  Godalure  M.J.  Cherian (supra),  this  Court  in  a

petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, lodged in

public interest,  did after taking note of  the fact that charge

sheet  had  already  been  submitted,   direct  the  CBI  to  hold

further  investigation  in  respect  of  the  offence  involved.   In

recording this conclusion, this Court did take note of the fact

that the nuns who had been the victim of the tragedy did not

come forward to identify the culprits and that as alleged by the

petitioners, the four persons set up by the police as accused

were  not  the  real  culprits  and  that  the  victims  were  being

asked to accept them to be so.  The paramount consideration

for  the  direction  issued  was  to  secure  justice  between  the

parties  and  to  instill  confidence  in  public  mind.  The  same

Page 75

75

imperative did impel this Court to issue a similar direction for

fresh investigation by the CBI in Punjab and Haryana High

Court Bar Association (supra).  Here as well the investigation

otherwise  had  been  completed  and  charge-sheet  was

submitted.

71. This  Court  dealing  with  the  proposition  that  once  a

charge  sheet  is  filed,  it  would  then  be  exclusively  in  the

domain of the competent court to deal with the case on merits

in  accordance  with  law  and  that  the  monitoring  of  the

investigation would cease in all respects, held, in particular, in

K.V.  Rajendran (supra)  in  reiteration  of  the  enunciations

aforestated,  that  though  it  is  ordinarily  so,  the  power  of

transferring investigation in  rare and exceptional cases for the

purpose  of  doing  justice  between  the  parties  and  to  instill

confidence  in  the  public  mind,   can  be  made  invoking  its

constitutional  power  available,  to  ensure a fair,  honest  and

complete investigation.   

72. The precedential ordainment against absolute prohibition

for assignment of investigation to any impartial agency like the

Page 76

76

CBI,  submission  of  the  charge-sheet  by  the  normal

investigating  agency  in  law  notwithstanding,  albeit  in  an

exceptional fact situation warranting such initiative, in order

to  secure  a  fair,  honest  and  complete  investigation  and  to

consolidate the confidence of the victim(s) and the public in

general  in  the   justice  administering  mechanism,  is  thus

unquestionably  absolute  and  hallowed  by  time.   Such  a

measure however can by no means be a matter of course or

routine but has to be essentially adopted in order to live up to

and  effectuate  the  salutary  objective  of  guaranteeing  an

independent and upright  mechanism of  justice dispensation

without fear or favour, by treating all alike.

73. In the decisions cited on behalf of the CBI as well,  this

Court in K. Saravanan Karuppasamy  and Sudipta Lenka,

(supra),  recounted the above propositions underpinning the

primacy of credibility and confidence in investigations and a

need  for  complete  justice  and  enforcement  of  fundamental

rights judged on the touchstone of high public interest and the

paramountcy of the rule of law.  

Page 77

77

74. The judicially propounded propositions on the aspects of

essentiality  and  justifiability  for  assignment  of  further

investigation or reinvestigation to an independent investigating

agency like the CBI, whether or not the probe into a criminal

offence  by  the  local/state  police  is  pending  or  completed,

irrespective of as well, the pendency of the resultant trial have

concretized  over  the  years,  applicability  whereof  however  is

contingent on the factual setting involved and the desideratum

for vigilant, sensitised and evenhanded justice to the parties.  

75. The  exhaustive  references  of  the  citations  seemingly

repetitive though, assuredly attest the conceptual consisting in

the expositions and enunciations on the issue highlighting the

cause of justice as the ultimate determinant for the course to

be adopted.

76. A “speedy trial”,  albeit  the essence of  the fundamental

right to life entrenched in the Article 21 of the Constitution of

India has a companion in concept in “fair trial”, both being in

alienable constituents of an adjudicative process, to culminate

in a judicial  decision by a court of  law as the final  arbiter.

Page 78

78

There is indeed a qualitative difference between right to speedy

trial and fair trial so much so that denial of the former  by

itself  would  not  be  prejudicial  to  the  accused,  when pitted

against the imperative of fair trial. As fundamentally, justice

not only has to be done but also must appear to have been

done,  the  residuary  jurisdiction  of  a  court  to  direct  further

investigation or reinvestigation by any impartial agency, probe

by  the  state  police  notwithstanding,  has  to  be  essentially

invoked  if  the  statutory  agency   already  in-charge  of  the

investigation appears to have been ineffective or is presumed

or  inferred  to  be  not  being  able  to  discharge  its  functions

fairly, meaningfully and fructuously.  As the cause of justice

has to reign supreme, a court of law cannot reduce itself to be

a  resigned  and  a  helpless  spectator  and  with  the  foreseen

consequences  apparently  unjust,  in  the  face  of  a  faulty

investigation,  meekly  complete  the  formalities  to  record  a

foregone conclusion.  Justice then would become a casualty.

Though a court’s satisfaction of want of proper, fair, impartial

and effective investigation eroding its credence and reliability

is the precondition for a direction for further investigation or

Page 79

79

reinvestigation, submission of the charge-sheet ipso facto or

the pendency of the trial  can by no means be a prohibitive

impediment.   The  contextual  facts  and  the  attendant

circumstances have to be singularly evaluated and analyzed to

decide  the  needfulness  of  further  investigation  or

reinvestigation to unravel the truth and mete out justice to the

parties. The prime concern and the endeavour of the court of

law is to secure justice on the basis of true facts which ought

to  be  unearthed  through  a  committed,  resolved  and  a

competent investigating agency.   

77. As every social order is governed by the rule of law, the

justice dispensing system cannot afford  any compromise in

the discharge of its sanctified role of administering justice on

the basis of the real facts and in accordance with law.  This is

indispensable,  in order to retain and stabilize the faith and

confidence  of  the  public  in  general  in  the  justice  delivery

institutions as envisioned by the Constitution.

78.  As succinctly summarised  by this Court in  Committee

for  Protection  of  Democratic  Right (supra),  the  extra

Page 80

80

ordinary power of the Constitutional  Courts in directing the

CBI  to  conduct  investigation  in  a  case  must  be  exercised

sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations, when it is

necessary  to  provide  credibility  and  instill  confidence  in

investigation  or  where  the  incident  may  have  national  or

international  ramifications  or  where  such  an  order  may  be

necessary  for  doing  complete  justice  and  for  enforcing  the

fundamental  rights.   In  our  comprehension,  each  of  the

determinants  is  consummate  and  independent  by  itself  to

justify the exercise of such power and is not inter-dependent

on each other.

79.  A trial encompasses investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal

and retrial  i.e.  the  entire  range  of  scrutiny  including  crime

detection  and   adjudication  on  the  basis  thereof.

Jurisprudentially,  the  guarantee  under  Article  21  embraces

both the life and liberty of the accused as well as interest of

the victim, his near and dear ones as well as of the community

at  large  and therefore  cannot  be  alienated from each other

with levity. It is judicially acknowledged that fair trial includes

Page 81

81

fair  investigation as envisaged by Articles 20 and 21 of  the

Constitution  of  India.  Though,  well  demarcated  contours  of

crime detection and adjudication do exist, if the investigation

is  neither  effective  nor  purposeful  nor  objective  nor  fair,  it

would  be  the  solemn obligation of  the  courts,  if  considered

necessary, to order further investigation or reinvestigation as

the  case  may  be,  to  discover  the  truth  so  as  to  prevent

miscarriage of the justice. No inflexible guidelines or hard and

fast rules as such can be prescribed by way of uniform and

universal invocation and the decision is to be conditioned to

the attendant facts and circumstances, motivated dominantly

by the predication of advancement of the cause of justice.   

80. Any criminal offence is one against the society at large

casting an onerous responsibility on the state, as the guardian

and  purveyor  of  human  rights  and  protector  of  law  to

discharge  its  sacrosanct  role  responsibly  and  committedly,

always accountable to the law abiding citizenry for any lapse.

The  power  of  the  constitutional  courts  to  direct  further

investigation or reinvestigation is a dynamic component of its

Page 82

82

jurisdiction to exercise judicial review, a basic feature of the

Constitution and though has to be exercised with due care

and  caution  and  informed  with  self  imposed  restraint,  the

plentitude and content thereof can neither be enervated nor

moderated by any legislation.

81. The expression “fair and proper investigation” in criminal

jurisprudence  was  held  by  this  Court  in  Vinay  Tyagi  vs

Irshad  Ali  @  Deepak  and  others (2013)5SCC  762  to

encompass two imperatives; firstly the investigation must be

unbiased,  honest,  just  and  in  accordance  with  law  and

secondly, the entire emphasis  has to be to bring out the truth

of the case before the court of competent jurisdiction.

82. Prior thereto, in the same vein, it was ruled in  Samaj

Parivartan Samudaya and others vs. State of Karnataka

and others  (2012)7SCC 407 that the basic  purpose of an

investigation   is to bring out the truth by conducting fair and

proper  investigation,  in  accordance  with  law and to  ensure

that  the  guilty  are  punished.   It  held  further  that  the

jurisdiction of a court to ensure fair and proper investigation

Page 83

83

in  an  adversarial  system of  criminal  administration  is  of  a

higher degree than in an inquisitorial  system and it  has to

take precaution that   interested or influential persons are not

able to misdirect or hijack the investigation, so as to throttle a

fair  investigation  resulting  in  the  offenders,  escaping  the

punitive course of law.  Any lapse, it was proclaimed, would

result in error of jurisdiction.

83. That the victim cannot be afforded to be treated as an

alien or total stranger to the criminal trial was reiterated by

this Court in  Rattiram  and others vs. State of Madhya

Pradesh (2012)4SCC 516.  It was postulated that the criminal

jurisprudence  with the passage of time has laid  emphasis on

victimology, which fundamentally is the perception of a trial

from the view point  of  criminal  as well  as  the victim when

judged in the social context.

84. This Court in National Human Rights Commission  vs.

State of Gujarat and others (2009)6SCC 767  did proclaim

unambiguously  that  discovery,  investigation  and

Page 84

84

establishment of truth are the main purposes of the courts of

justice and indeed are raison d’etre for their existence.

85. That the preeminence of  truth is the guiding star in a

judicial  process  forming the  foundation of  justice  had been

aptly  propounded  by  this  Court  in  Maria  Margarida

Sequeira  Fernandes  and  others  vs.  Erasmo  Jack  De

Sequeira (dead) through L.Rs (2012)5SCC 370.  It was ruled

that  the  entire  judicial  system  had  been   created  only  to

discern and find out the real truth and that the Judges at all

levels have to seriously engage themselves in the journey of

discovering the same.  Emphasizing that the quest for truth is

the  mandate  of  law  and  indeed  the  bounden  duty  of  the

courts, it was observed  that the justice system will  acquire

credibility only when the people will be convinced that justice

is based on the foundation of the truth.  While referring with

approval,  the revealing observation made in  Ritesh Tewari

and another vs. State of U.P. and others (2010)10SCC 677

that  every trial  is voyage of  discovery in which truth is  the

quest,  the  following  passage  of  Lord  Denning   scripted  in

Page 85

85

Jones vs. National Coal Board (1957) 2 All ER 155(CA) was

extracted in affirmation:

“…It’s all very well to paint justice blind, but she does  better  without  a  bandage  round  her  eyes. She should be blind indeed to favour or prejudice, but clear to see which way lies the truth.”

86. A strain of  piognance and disquiet over the insensitive

approach of the court concerned in the textual facts in the

context of fair trial in the following observations of this Court

in  Vinod  Kumar  vs.  State  of  Punjab (2015)3  SCC  220

sounds an awakening caveat:

“The narration of the sad chronology shocks the judicial conscience and gravitates  the mind to pose  a  question:  Is  it  justified  for  any conscientious trial Judge to ignore the statutory command, not recognize “the felt necessities of time” and remain impervious to the cry of  the collective asking for justice or give an indecent and uncalled for burial to the conception of trial, totally  ostracizing  the  concept  that  a  civilized and  orderly  society  thrives  on  the  rule  of  law which includes “fair trial” for the accused as well as the prosecution.”  

87. The  observations  though  made  in  the  backdrop  of

repeated adjournments granted by the trial court, chiefly for

cross-examination of a witness resulting in the delay of  the

Page 86

86

proceedings, the concern expressed is of overarching relevance

demanding  sentient  attention  and  remedial  response.   The

poser  indeed  stems  from the  indispensable  interface  of  the

orderly existence of the society founded on the rule of law and

“fair trial” for the accused as well as the prosecution.  That the

duty of the Court while conducting a trial is to be guarded by

the  mandate  of  law,  conceptual  fairness  and  above  all  its

sacrosanct role to arrive at the truth on the basis of material

brought on record, was reiterated.

88. Adverting to the role of the police to be one for protection

of life, liberty and property of citizens,  with investigation of

offences being one of its foremost duties, it  was underscored

in  Manohar  Lal  Sharma  vs.  Principal  Secretary   and

others (2014)2SCC  532   that  the  aim  of  investigation  is

ultimately  to  search for  truth  and  to  bring  the  offendor  to

book.  The observations of Lord Denning in his rendering in

“The Due Process of Law” First Indian Reprint 1993 page 102

were alluded to at page 553 as under:

“In safeguarding our freedoms, the police play a vital role.  Society for its defence needs a well-led,

Page 87

87

well-trained  and  well-disciplined  force  of  police whom it can trust; and enough of them to be able to prevent crime before it happens, or if it does happen,  to  detect  it  and  bring  the  accused  to justice.

The police,  of  course, must act properly.   They must obey the rules of right conduct.  They must not  extort  confessions  by  threats  or  promises. They  must  not  search  a  man’s  house  without authority. They must not use more force than the occasion warrants.”

89. The avowed purpose of a criminal investigation and its

efficacious  prospects  with  the  advent  of  scientific  and

technical advancements have been candidly synopsized  in  the

prefatory  chapter  dealing  with  the  history  of  criminal

investigation  in  the  treatise   on  Criminal  Investigation –

Basic  Perspectives  by  Paul  B.  Weston  and  Renneth  M.

Wells:

“Criminal  investigation  is  a  lawful  search  for people  and  things  useful  in  reconstructing  the circumstances of an illegal act or omission and the mental state accompanying it.  It is probing from the known to the unknown, backward in time, and its goal is to determine  truth as far as it can be discovered in any post-factum inquiry.

Successful  investigations  are  based  on  fidelity, accuracy,  and sincerity  in  lawfully  searching  for the true facts of an event under investigation and

Page 88

88

on an equal faithfulness, exactness, and probity in reporting the results of an investigation.  Modern investigators  are  persons  who stick  to  the  truth and are absolutely clear about the time and place of  an  event  and  the  measurable  aspects  of evidence.   They  work  throughout  their investigation fully  recognizing  that  even a  minor contradiction  or  error  may destroy confidence in their investigation.

The  joining  of  science  with  traditional  criminal investigation  techniques  offers  new  horizons  of efficiency  in  criminal  investigation.   New perspectives in investigation bypass reliance upon informers  and  custodial  interrogation  and concentrate upon a skilled scanning of the crime scene  for  physical  evidence  and a  search for  as many witnesses as possible. Mute evidence tells its own  story  in  court,  either  by  its  own demonstrativeness or through the testimony of an expert  witness  involved  in  its  scientific  testing. Such  evidence   may  serve  in  lieu  of,  or   as corroboration of, testimonial evidence of witnesses found and interviewed  by police in an extension of their responsibility to seek out  the truth of all the circumstances of crime happening.  An increasing certainty  in  solving  crimes  is  possible  and  will contribute  to  the major  deterrent  of  crime –  the certainty  that  a  criminal  will  be  discovered, arrested and convicted.    

90. Reverting  to  the  facts,  the  gruesome  and  sordid

assassination  of  the  appellant’s  husband in  broad  day  light

under the public gaze is not in dispute.  As a consequence of

Page 89

89

the murderous assault  with firearms and indiscriminate use

thereof,  Raju  Pal  along  with  two  others  fell  to  the  bullets.

Records  seem  to  suggest  that  even  prior  to  the  incident,

attempts were made on his life but he survived the same in

view of  the  timely  intervention  of  the  security  guards.  That

representations  were  made  by  him  seeking  additional

protection and that  after  his  murder,  the  appellant  and the

party  higher  ups  of  Raju  Pal  had  persistently  appealed,

amongst others, to the Governor and the Chief Minister of the

State  for  handing  over  the  investigation  to  the  CBI  is  also

testified by the records.  

91. Pleaded imputations of the appellant include deliberate,

uncalled for and mysterious replacement of the earlier sets of

personal security officers/gunners of the deceased, presence of

high police officials near the place of occurrence, indifference

on  the  part  of  the  state  police  to  act  with  alacrity,  hasty

conduct of the post mortem of the dead body and cremation

thereof without handing over the same to the appellant or any

of his relatives, political pressure on the investigating agency to

Page 90

90

distort the course of the probe and to screen the incriminating

evidence collected etc.  One of the Investigating Officers in his

writ petition, questioning his suspension had also pleaded on

oath about the unexpected and unwarranted interference of the

higher ups in the department to withhold evidence gathered in

course  of  the  investigation  underway.   Though  nothing

decisively  turn on these  accusations,  the  same having  been

refuted  by  the  respondents,  the  fact  remains  that  the

appellant’s husband had been mercilessly killed by a group of

gun wielding assailants in a public place, in the open view of

all  concerned.   Such a daring and desperate act did have a

terrorizing impact on the society sending shock waves amongst

all cross sections of the community and received wide coverage

by the media.  The incident understandably is not one to be

lightly glossed over or trivialized.

92. The  trial  on  the  basis  of  the  investigation  completed

hitherto  by  the  state  police  and  the  CBCID  has  remained

stayed by the orders of this Court.  Prior thereto however as per

the materials laid before this Court, several eye-witnesses cited

Page 91

91

by the investigating agency have been examined.  As the trial is

pending for the present, we refrain from commenting on their

testimony,  except  that  they  seem to  have  resiled  from their

statements under Section 161 of the Code.   Having regard to

the  manner  in  which the  offence  had been committed,  it  is

incomprehensible  that  there  was  no  eye-witness  to  the

incident.   Thus, if  the persons cited as eye-witnesses by the

investigating agency retract from their version made before the

police,  then  either  they  have  been  wrongly  projected  as

eye-witnesses or they have for right or wrong reasons resiled

from their earlier narration.  In both the eventualities, in our

opinion,  the  investigation  has  to  be  faulted  as  inefficient,

incomplete and incautious with the inevitable consequence of

failure of the prosecution in the case in hand.  Such a fall out

also spells a dismal failure of the state machinery as a pivotal

stake holder in the process of justice dispensation to protect

and  assure  the  witnesses  of  their  safety  and  security  so  to

fearlessly testify the truth. We would hasten to add that these

observations are by no means suggestive of the complicity of

the respondent Nos. 4 & 5 and other accused persons standing

Page 92

92

trial.   These,  to  reiterate,  are  farthest  from  even  any

presumptive hypothesis of their involvement in the offence for

the  present  and  are  engendered  by  the  concern  of  possible

failure  of  justice.   If  the  investigating  agencies,  as  involved,

have not been able to identify and present eye-witnesses of the

incident  who  would  under  all  circumstance  religiously  and

devotedly  abide  by  their  version  about  the  same,  the

shortcoming apparently is in the probe made, sadly reflecting

on the competence, commitment and efficacy of such agencies.

The very fact that this Court had earlier stayed the trial while

permitting the appellant to approach the High Court with the

relief for assignment of the investigation to the CBI does signify

its  expectation that  the  High Court  would  adopt  a  sensitive

insight  into  the  issues raised and appropriately  address the

same.  The pendency of the trial and the examination of the

witnesses so far made thus in our estimate is not a disarming

factor for this Court, to consider the necessity of entrusting the

investigation  to  the  CBI  even  at  this  stage.  To  reiterate,  a

decision in this regard has to be induced and impelled by the

cause of justice viewed in the overall facts and circumstances

Page 93

93

attendant on the incident.  No inflexible norm or guideline is

either available or feasible.   

93. The present factual conspectus leaves one with a choice

either  to  let  the  ongoing  trial  casually  drift  towards  its

conclusion with the possibility of offence going unpunished or

to embark upon investigation belated though, spurred by the

intervening developments, to unravel the truth, irrespective of

the persons involved.  As it is, every offence is a crime against

the society and is unpardonable, yet there are some species of

ghastly,  revolting  and  villainous  violations  of  the  invaluable

right to life which leave all sensible and right minded persons

of the society shell shocked and traumatized in body and soul.

Such incidents mercifully rare though are indeed exceptionally

agonizing,  eliciting  resentful  condemnation  of  all  and  thus

warrant  an  extra-ordinary  attention  for  adequate  remedial

initiatives to prevent their recurrence.  In our considered view,

even if such  incidents otherwise diabolical and horrendous do

not  precipitate,  national  or  international  ramifications,  these

undoubtedly  transcend  beyond  the  confines  of  individual

Page 94

94

tragedies  and  militatively  impact  upon the  society’s  civilized

existence.  If  the cause of complete justice and protection of

human  rights  are  the  situational  demands  in  such

contingencies, order for further investigation or reinvestigation,

even  by  an  impartial  agency  as  the  CBI  ought  to  be  a

peremptory measure  in the overwhelming cause of justice.

94. Judged in these perspectives, we are of the firm opinion

that  notwithstanding  the  pendency  of  the  trial,  and  the

availability of the power of the courts below under Sections 311

and 391 of the Code read with Section 165 of the Evidence Act,

it is of overwhelming and imperative necessity that to rule out

any  possibility  of  denial  of  justice  to  the  parties  and  more

importantly  to  instill  and  sustain  the  confidence  of  the

community at large, the CBI ought to be directed to undertake

a de novo investigation in the incident.   We take this  view,

conscious about the parameters precedentially formulated, as

in our comprehension in the unique facts and circumstances of

the case any contrary view would leave the completed process

of crime detection in the case wholly inconsequential and the

Page 95

95

judicial process impotent. A court of law, to reiterate has to be

an involved participant in the quest for truth and justice and is

not  expected  only  to officiate a formal ritual in a proceeding

farseeing  an  inevitable  end  signaling  travesty  of  justice.

Mission justice so expectantly and reverently entrusted to the

judiciary would then be reduced to a teasing illusion and a

sovereign  and  premier  constitutional  institution  would  be

rendered  a  suspect  for  its  existence  in  public  estimation.

Considering  the  live  purpose  for  which judiciary  exists,  this

would indeed be a price which it cannot afford to bear under

any circumstance.  

95. In the wake of the above, we are unhesitatingly inclined

to entrust  the  CBI,  with the task of  undertaking  a  de  novo

investigation  in  the  incident  of  murder  of  Raju  Pal,  the

husband of the appellant as afore-mentioned.  Though a plea

has been raised on behalf of the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in

particular  that  this  incident  has  been  exploited  by  the

appellant  for  her  political  gains,  we  are  left  unpersuaded

thereby, as her achievements in  public life must have been

Page 96

96

fashioned by very many ponderable as well  as imponderable

factors.  In  any  view of the matter, such a contention, in our

view, is of no consequence or relevance.  We would, however

make it abundantly clear that  this direction for entrustment of

the investigation to the CBI anew has been made in view of the

exceptional  features  of  the  case  as  overwhelmingly

demonstrated  by  attendant  facts  and  circumstances

indispensably  necessitating the same.

96. We are aware that in the meantime, over a decade has

passed.  The call of justice however demands, that the CBI in

spite of the constraints that it may face in view of the time lag,

would  make  all  possible  endeavours  to  disenter  the  truth

through its effective and competent investigation and submit

the same before the trial court, as early as possible preferably

within the period of six months from today. The clarion call of

justice expects a befitting response from the country’s premier

and  distinguished  investigating  agency.   On  receipt  of  the

report by the CBI only, the trial court would proceed therewith

in  accordance  with  law and conduct  and conclude  the  trial

Page 97

97

expeditiously and not later than six months. The interim order

staying the ongoing trial is hereby made absolute.  

97. The appeal is thus allowed in the above terms.

     …..... …....................................J.  (V. GOPALA GOWDA)

        …............................................J.   (AMITAVA ROY)

NEW DELHI; JANUARY 22, 2016.