Surendra Singh Jadaun vs State Of M.P. & Others

S.A.Dharmadhikari, J

This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the accused seeking fair investigation in Crime No. 229/2021 registered

at P.S. Lahar, District Bhind for the offences punishable under sections 323, 294, 452, 506 read with 34 of the IPC against the peitioner who is a

Government Servant working as Driver, Fire Brigade in Municipal Council, Lahar, District Bhind.

Brief facts leading to filing of this case are that petitioner and complainant are neighbours with adjacent houses. However, their relations have been

strained since long owing to several complaints made by petitioner's father against the complainant and his family members for having illegally

received the benefits of Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna from Municipal Council, Lahar. On 20/5/2021, an altercation ensued between petitioner's sons

and complainant party upon a wall constructed upon the house of the petitioner that was being dismantaled by petitioner's sons, which ultimately led to

lodging of the FIR in question.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Police Authorities being hand-in-glove with the complainant refused to register the FIR lodged by

family members of the petitioner on the date of incident, but registered the FIR at the instance of complainant party, while the FIR at the behest of

family members of the petitioners was registered a day later just to give benefit to the complainant party. A plea of alibi has been taken by the

petitioner contending that in compliance of order dated 20/5/2021 passed by CMO, Municipal Council, Lahar, at the relevant point of time he was busy

in inspection of old Fire Brigade that had come after repairs in the Office of Municipal Council, Lahar along with Driver Ramashankar and in

presence of Incharge CMO Shri Mahendra Singh between 3.30 PM to 5.15 PM. To buttress his submissions, copy of order dated 20/5/2021 and

inspection report of the even date have been filed as Annexures P/8 and P/9. It is further submitted that petitioner has sent representation (Annexure

P/10) to respondent no.5 and other Government Authorities for conducitng fair and impartial investigation in the matter, but to no avail. Accordingly, it

is prayed that respondents/Police Authorities may be directed to conduct a fair and impartial investigation in the matter taking into consideration

Annexures P/8, P/9 and P/10.

Per contra, learned Government Advocate opposed the prayer and submitted that accused has no right to direct the Investigating Agency to conduct

investigation in a particular manner. As such, the petition being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed at the threshold.

Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

The Apex Court in the case of Sidhartha Vashisth alias Manu Sharma vs. State (NCT of Delhi) ((2010) 6 SCC 1) commenting on the necessity of

insisting upon the fairness of investigation observed thus:-

......The criminal justice administration system in India places human rights and dignity for human life at a much higher pedestal. ......The

investigation should be judicious, fair, transparent and expeditious to ensure compliance with the basic rule of law. These are the fundamental canons

of our criminal jurisprudence and they are quite in conformity with the constitutional mandate contained in Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of

India.

In Nirmal Singh Kahlon vs. State of Punjab & Others ((2009) 1 SCC 441) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that ""fairness of the investigation is meant

not only for the accused but even for the victim."" In paragraph 28 of the report the Supreme Court expounded:-

An accused is entitled to a fair investigation. Fair investigation and fair trial are concomitant to preservation of fundamental right of an accused

under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. But the State has a larger obligation i.e. to maintain law and order, public order and preservation of peace

and harmony in the society. A victim of a crime, thus, is equally entitled to a fair investigation.

In a criminal prosecution, there is an obligation cast on the investigator not only to be fair, judicious and just during investigation, but also that the

investigation on the very face of it must appear to be so, eschewing any conduct or impression which may give rise to a real and genuine apprehension

in the mind of an accused and not mere fanciful, that the investigation was not fair.

In the decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Pooja Pal Vs. Union of India and Ors.; (2016) 3 SCC 135 the object and scope of free, fair

and proper investigation has been appropriately described thus :-

The expression ""fair and proper investigation"" in criminal jurisprudence was held by this Court in Vinay Tyagi VS. Irshad Ali (2013)5SCC 762 to

encompass two imperatives; firstly the investigation must be unbiased, honest, just and in accordance with law; and secondly, the entire emphasis has

to be to bring out the truth of the case before the court of competent jurisdiction.

XXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Adverting to the role of the police to be one for protection of life, liberty and property of citizens, with investigation of offences being one of its

foremost duties, it was underscored in Manohar Lal Sharma vs. Union of India (2014)2SCC 532 that the aim of investigation is ultimately to search for

truth and to bring the offender to book. The observations of Lord Denning in his rendering in ""The Due Process of Law"" First Indian Reprint 1993

page 102 were alluded to at page 553 as under: (SCC p.553, para 25)

25.......In safeguarding our freedoms, the police play a vital role. Society for its defence needs a well-led, well- trained and well-disciplined force of

police whom it can trust; and enough of them to be able to prevent crime before it happens, or if it does happen, to detect it and bring the accused to

justice.

The police, of course, must act properly. They must obey the rules of right conduct. They must not extort confessions by threats or promises. They

must not search a man's house without authority. They must not use more force than the occasion warrants.

Thus investigating agency should seek to discover material/ information from all quarters for conducting free and fair investigation to arrive at the

truth. The investigating agency should not forget that crime investigation is a probe in the dark moving from known to unknown backward in time,

conducted to achieve the sole object of arriving at the truth. In this process the investigating agency should be receptive to all possible sources of

material/ information which may assist the agency to conclude the investigation properly. One of the sources can also be the accused.

In view of the aforesaid settled legal position and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate

and, accordingly, directs respondent no.5/Superintendent of Police to ensure free, fair and impartial investigation in the matter taking into consideration

Annexures P/8, P/9 and P/10, in accordance with law.

The petition, accordingly, stands disposed of.