w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Ishwar Singh v/s Commissioner Of Police, Delhi And Others

    Cr. Writ No. 112 of 1981

    Decided On, 18 November 1981

    At, High Court of Delhi


    For the Petitioner: V.P. Prabhakar, Advocate. For the Respondent: Sodhi Teja Singh, Advocate.

Judgment Text


The petitioner has prayed for the quashing of proceedings under S. 107/151, Criminal P.C. pending against him before the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Nangloi, on the basis of a report made by the Station House Officer, Police Station, Nangloi. A no

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

tice to show cause why the petition should not be admitted was issued and a counter-affidavit has been filed as well as a rejoinder. We have gone through the allegations made in the petition which are to the effect that the police has been repeatedly involving the petitioner in cases under Sections 107/151, Cr.P.C., and in other cases. On considering those grounds, we find that no case has been made out for quashing the pending proceedings under Sections 107/151 of the Code.

2. The petitioner has also prayed that all future cases which may arise against him should be investigated by a police agency other than that situated at police station, Nangloi. At present there is no case under investigation against the petitioner. We think that this claim is premature and we cannot accede to the same. We would accordingly reject both the grounds raised in the petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner wants us to note in the order that the Supreme Court had ordered the transfer of an investigation to another Police Station in an unreported case Ramjit Singh v. Commr. of Police, S.L.P. No. 1644 of 1981 and also, there were two writ petitions namely, J. L. Gupta v. Commr. of Police, Criminal Writ Petn. No. 72 of 1980, and Anant Ram Sethi v. Commr. of Police, wherein investigation had been ordered to be handed over to another Police Station. These cases were decided in this Court. We have already had occasion to take note of these judgments elsewhere.

4. If the circumstances justify the transfer of any pending criminal case, then the ordinary rules governing such transfers will apply and the Court will certainly have jurisdiction to transfer such proceedings to some other Court. That is not the prayer in this case. Similarly, if a case is under investigation, a Writ Court may in a suitable case direct that the investigation may be made over to some other agency. However, the provisions of S. 156 of the Cr.P.C. show that the investigation has to be initially by the Officer-in-charge of a Police Station and no other officer can investigate. He may depute another police official of the same Police Station junior to himself to investigate under Section 157. Therefore to entrust the investigation to some other police officer requires a specific order by the Court. Inasmuch as no proceedings are pending, we cannot pass a general order in anticipation of a future event. The petition is dismissed in limine.

Petition dismissed