Calcutta High Court: Annual Digest 2021

As we step into 2022, LiveLaw brings to you a yearly Round-up of important updates from the Calcutta High Court. This yearly digest includes 182 orders and judgments divided into 21 different subject heads. Criminal Law 1. Section 173(8) CrPC No Bar For Writ Courts To Transfer Investigation To CBI [Jyotsna Roy v. State of West Bengal & Ors]Taking note of the wide gaps in a criminal investigation carried out by the Siliguri Police in connection to the alleged murder of an Intelligence Bureau (IB) Officer holding sensitive information, the Calcutta High Court on Thursday transferred the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). "A fair trial wholly depends on the quality of investigation. If there are several loopholes in the investigation or an absence of collection or preservation of crucial evidence, the investigation becomes superficial and perfunctory," the Single bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya said while handing over the case to CBI. The Bench also made it clear that Section 173(8) of CrPC pertaining to powers of the Police to carry on 'further investigation' does not preclude the Courts from passing further directions, if it deems it appropriate to do so in fit circumstances.The Court held, "Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. deals with Report of police officer on completion of the investigation and sub-section 8 provides that nothing in the section shall preclude further investigation in respect of an offence after a report has been forwarded to the Magistrate. This court is of the view that Section 173(8) cannot prevent a Writ Court from passing further directions if the court deems it appropriate to do so in fit circumstances." The Court observed that Section 173(8) is premised on the action of the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned police station on obtaining further evidence after a final report of the investigation has been made. "The scope of the provision is limited in operation and is dependent on the Officer chancing upon a piece of evidence after completion of investigation" it remarked while pointing towards several loopholes in the investigation in this case.2. Prima Facie Bias Or Mala Fide Exercise Of Power By State Authorities Necessary For Transferring A Case To CBI [Malati Roy v. State of West Bengal and others]The Calcutta High Court observed that the Court is empowered to transfer an investigation to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) only where there is a specific instance of bias or mala fide exercise of power on the part of State authorities. Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya was dealing with the issue of investigation of death of one Ulen Roy who was killed during a Yuva Morcha in Siliguri last year. The unfortunate accident of firing that took place on 7th December 2020 claimed the life of Ulen Roy who participated in the procession. The complaint was thereafter filed on 9th December 2020. Subsequently, the matter was handed over to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) on 10th December 2020.The Court was also of the view that vague and unsubstantiated allegations are simply not enough for transferring cases to CBI. "Appointing an independent agency rests on the notion that the measures taken to unravel the truth are not enough. The facts must point to blatant omissions and unmistakable lacunae in the fact-finding exercise so that the court would have no other alternative but to transfer the investigation to an independent agency. The apprehension of interference in the investigation by the State machineries or by parties who are interested in the outcome of the investigation must be clearly borne out from records." the Court held. Furthermore, the bench also observed that a court is empowered to transfer an investigation to another agency provided the court finds that high officials of State authorities are involved or the accusation is against top officials of the investigating agency thereby allowing them to influence the investigation or where the investigation is prima facie found to be tainted.3. Coal Mining Probe: Calcutta High Court DB Stays Single Bench Verdict Which Held Specific Consent Of State Govt Was Needed For CBI To Investigate Beyond 'Railway Areas' [The Central Bureau of Investigation v. Anup Majee and Others]The Calcutta High Court stayed the Single Judge Bench ruling which had ruled that probe beyond the Railway areas (in the State of West Bengal), shall be conducted by the CBI only subject to specific consent being granted by appropriate authorities of the State of West Bengal. The Division Bench, in its order, noted, "Proper investigation cannot be carried out if the investigation in such cases is divided into parts, drawing lines on territories once the premier central agency is in the process of investigation." The Court also remarked, "In case during the pendency of the present appeals, the investigation being carried out by the CBI is hampered, the process of investigation at this stage will certainly be prejudiced, which will...

Calcutta High Court: Annual Digest 2021

Aaratrika Bhaumik

Tags