Satisfied With CB-CID Investigation, Madras High Court Refuses CBI Probe Into Custodial Death

The Madras High Court recently refused to transfer the investigation of the alleged custodial death of Vignesh to the Central Bureau of Investigation. Justice V Sivagnanam observed that the investigation by CB-CID was satisfactory and that there was no need to transfer the case.

On a perusal of the investigation status report, I find no materials to show that the present investigating agency, CBCID conducted the investigation in a tainted or bias manner. I am of the opinion that the present case does not fall into the category of rare cases. Upon consideration of the materials, in my view, proper investigation is being conducted.

Vignesh, who was intercepted by the police was allegedly assaulted by the authorities and later died.

The court was dismissing a petition filed by the brother of the deceased. The family alleged that the investigation was being conducted in a biased manner. It was submitted that the petitioner was not given any notice as per Section 15A of the SC/ST (PoA) Act when the accused had moved bail applications.

The petitioners thus sought to transfer the investigation to the CBI as the police investigation was in a biased manner and the same would not render any justice. The police investigation was slack and in total disregard to the victims, it was alleged.

Fair Investigation is part of the Constitutional Rights guaranteed to the victims under the Constitution of India. Therefore, investigation has to be fair and transparent. But, it is not fair in this case. The Investigating Agency cannot be permitted to conduct an investigation in a tentative and biased manner, the petitioners argued. 

The state contended that it had taken appropriate action in the matter. The Director General of Police had transferred the case to the CBCID from the Assistant Commissioner and the accused had been arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

The State further submitted that the investigation was pending only for the reason that the Viscera Report from the Forensic Science Department, Enquiry Report from the Metropolitan Magistrate regarding cause of death and the Expert Opinion with respect to the analysis of the DNA of the accused and victim with that found from the steel rod was pending. Further, expert opinion with regard to analysis of the mobile phone was also pending. 

Thus, the State submitted that the investigation was almost completed without any deviation and that there was no bias on the part of the investigating officer.

The court noted that there was no hard and fast rule that can be universally applied while deciding transferring of cases. 

The decision whether transfer of investigation should or should not be ordered rests on the Court's satisfaction, whether the facts and circumstances of a given case demand such an Order. No hard-and-fast rule has been or can possibly be prescribed for universal application to all cases.

The court noted that the present case did not fall into the category of rarest of rare cases and proper investigation was being conducted. Further, there was no evidence to prove that the CBCID had conducted the investigation in a tainted and biased manner.

Case Title: V Vijay and another v. The State and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 453

Case No: WP No.19672 of 2022

Click here to read/download the judgment