Magistrate Or Special Court's Power To Supervise Investigation Doesn't Include Right To Question FIR Validity: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the power of a Magistrate or a Special Court to supervise an investigation does not include the right to question the validity of the FIR.A division bench headed by Justice Prathiba M Singh said that the Magistrate or Special Court must remain a “silent spectator” till filling of the final report under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C and limit its actions to judicial assistance. The Bench also said that the investigation is the prerogative of the police or investigative agency and the Court shall not interfere with it till the Final Report is submitted. “The questioning of the validity of the FIR can only be raised under the provisions of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C or Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India and since the concerned learned Metropolitan Magistrate or the Special Court do not exercise inherent powers under the Cr.P.C and there is no provision provided for in the Cr.P.C for bringing to the notice of Hon'ble High Court for appropriate order for quashing of the FIR then the same would be not impermissible. Similarly, the power to supervise an investigation definitely does not include the right to question the same,” the bench also comprising of Justice Amit Sharma observed. Furthermore, the Court held that validity of the FIR cannot be examined by the concerned Court, however, any assistance sought by the investigating agency during the course of the investigation still have to be determined by Courts in view of the settled principles of law.The Bench disposed of a suo motu criminal reference as well as a criminal writ petition filed by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The case arose from series of allegations regarding corruption that occurred during the execution of certain purchase orders placed for supply of spare parts by various Public Sector Undertakings, including the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd., Oil & Natural Gas Corporation and Gas Authority of India to M/s Rolls Royce Plc. (London) during 2007-2011. Answering various questions referred by the Special Court, the division bench held that a reference to the High Court can be made even before the chargesheet is filed or even during an investigation. However, it added that for making a valid reference, the case must be pending before the court; the Court of Session or a Metropolitan Magistrate ought to formulate the question of law arising from the hearing of the said case and the reference has to be made only for some compelling reason in an extraordinary circumstance, and not for any fanciful or spent up purpose. “A reference can be made at any stage of a criminal process including at the stage of investigation prior to the submission of final report under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. But for making a valid reference under Section 395(2), the case (i.e., any application, petition, trial, appeal or revision etc.,) ought to be pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate or the Sessions Judge,” the Court observed. Furthermore, the Court said that if the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence but rather a non-cognizable offence, the Police or CBI cannot register an FIR or start an investigation.“They must file a CSR report and mandatorily follow the procedure prescribed under Section 155 of Cr.P.C to initiate an investigation. But, in case the information discloses the commission of a cognizable offense, an FIR can be registered and investigation can be initiated,” it said. The bench also observed that where the CBI feels that the information received does not disclose sufficient information to justify registration of an RC or FIR for a cognizable offence, it can register a preliminary enquiry or conduct an enquiry and then arrive at a conclusion as to whether a cognizable offence is disclosed and whether an RC or FIR has to be registered or not.Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Vikas Padora (Amicus Curiae) with Mr. Dipanshu Chugh, AdvCounsel for Respondent: Mr. Anupam Sharma, SPP-CBI with Mr. Prakarsh Airan, Ms. Harpreet Kalsi, Mr. Abhishek Batra, Mr. Ripudaman Sharma, Mr. Vashisht Rao & Mr. Syamantak Modgill, AdvsTitle: Court on its own motion v. StateCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1301Click here to read order

Magistrate Or Special Court's Power To Supervise Investigation Doesn't Include Right To Question FIR Validity: Delhi High Court

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags