Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

STATE OF WEST BENGAL versus S. N. BASAK

Decided
12 April 1962
Judges listed
J.L. KAPUR (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Appeal(s) allowed

Citations

Official
[1963] 2 S.C.R. 52 · 1962 INSC 140
Also cited as
  • AIR 1963 SC 447 (24 citing judgments)

Learned from how other judgments cite this one, in their text or in the official Supreme Court Reports' lists of cases they refer to: each is cited this way by at least two judgments, and at least twice as often as any other citation to this judgment in that report. We hold no commercial reporter's text, only these citation strings.

Cited by

Cited in 8 other Supreme Court judgments we hold. The 5 most recent:

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

KAPUR, J.-This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the .High Court of Calcutta quashing the investigation started against the respondent in regard to offences under s. 420, Indian Penal Code, and s. 120B read with s. 420 of the Indian .Pena.I Code.

p. 53

On March 26, 19o0, Sub- Inspector B. L. Ghose of Police Inforcement Branch filed a written report before the Officer-in-charge Uha.kdha P. S., alleging that the respondent in conspiracy with three others had cheated the Government of West Bengal of a sum of .Rs. 20,000. The respondent at tho time was an Assistant-cum·Executivc Engineer, Kanchrnpara Development Area, Kalyani Division. Un the basis of this report a First Information Report was drawn up and the police started investigation. On April 4, 1960, the respondent surrendered in the court of the Judicial Magistrate at Hanaghat an<l was released on bail for a sum of Rs. 1,000/·. The respondent th11n on May 9, 1960, filed a petition under ss. 439 and 561A of the Criminal Procedure Code and prayed for a rule against the District Magistrate, Nadia, to show cause why the judicial case pending in the court of the Senior Magistrate Ranagaghat a.rising out of the Chakdah Polioe Station Case No. 33 dated March 26, 1960, be not quashed. The High Court bold :-

pp. 53–54

"In our view, the statutory power of investigation given to the police under Chapter XIV is not available in respect of an offence triable under the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act 1949, and that being so, the investigation conoerned is without jurisdiction. In so saying, we a.re oonsicious of the observations of their Lordships of the Privy Council in Nazir Ahmad's

p. 54

case, 71 Indian Appeals, 203". and therefore quashed the police investigation of the case holding it to be without jurisdiction. It is against this judgment and order that the :State has come in appeal to this Court on "certificate granted by tho High Court under Art.134 (l )(c).

p. 54

At the time the respondent filed the petition in the High Court only a written report wae made to tho polic<> by the Sub-Inspector of police Enfor· cement Branch and on the basis of that report a FirRt Information Report. waR recPrded by the Officer•in.charge of the Police Station and investigation had started. There was no case pending at the time excepting that the respondent had appeared before the Court, had surrendered and had been admitted to bail. rhe powers of investiga. tion into cognizable offences are ·contained in Chapter XIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 154 which is in that Chapter deals· with information in cognizable offences ands. 156 with investigation into such offences and under these s~ctions the police has the statutory right to investigate into the circumstances of any alleged cognizable offence without authority from a Magistrate and this statutory power of the police to investigate cannot be interfered with by the exercise of power under s. 439 or under the inherent power of the court under s. 56IA of Criminal Procedure Code. As to the powers of the Judiciary in regard to statutory right of the police to investigate, the Privy Council in King Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir observed as follows:-

pp. 54–55

"The functions of the judiciary and the police are complementary, not overlapping, and the combination of individual liberty with a due observance of law and order is only to be obtained by leaving each to exercise its own function, always, of course, subject to the right of the court to intervene in an appropri· ate case when moved. under s. 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code to give directions in the nature of habeas corpus. In such a case as the present, however, the court's functions begin when a charge is preferred before it, and not until then. It lia.s sometimes been thought that s. 561A hai given increased powers to the Court which it did not possess before that section was enacted. But this is not so, the section gives no µew powers, i~ 119ttJ 7!. J, /;.

p. 55

only provides that those which the court already inherently poRseBBes shall be preserved and is inserted as their Lordships think, lest it should be considered that the only powers possessed by the court are those expressly conferred by the Criminal Procedure Code and that no inherent powers had survived the

p. 56

passing of that Act". With this interpretation, which has been put on the statutory duties and powers of the police and of the powers of the- Court, we are in accord. The High 0ourt was in error therefore in interfering with the powers of the police in investigating into the offence which was alleged in the information sent to the Officer-in-charge of the police station.

p. 56

W c therefore allow this appeal and set &Bide the order of the High Court. The investigation will now proceed in accordance with law.

p. 56

Appeal allawed. HINDUSTAN IDEAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

p. 56

v. LIFE INSURANCE OORPORATION OF INDIA (A. K. K. and J. R. JJ.)

p. 56

of-

p. 56

(2) (f) -Life

p. 56

The of an of The

p. 56