SC: Accused Not Entitled to Acquittal on the Sole Ground of Investigator Being the Complainant

Must Read

Supreme Court Upheld “Environmental Rule of Law” in NGT Decision to Demolish Illegal Hotel on Forest Land

This case concerns the dispute relating to the additional construction of hotel-cum-restaurant structure in the Bus Stand Complex along...

UK Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Policyholders in the COVID-19 Business Interruption Case

The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court finally concluded the long-awaited COVID-19 business interruption case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority...

Kerala High Court Disposes of Writ Petition on Grounds That Reliefs Sought Are Already in Process of Being Granted, Directs State to Complete the...

Excerpt A single-judge bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice Shircy V. gave orders on the writ petition filed by the Petitioner....

Supreme Court Directs Government To Provide Free Education To Minor Children of Rape Victims

The Deputy Commissioner of Ranchi was directed by the Supreme Court on Wednesday to make sure that minor children of rape victims are ensured free education till they attain the age of 14 years. The Court made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a woman who claimed that she belonged to the SC/ST group from Jharkhand. She was forced by a man after which her father lodged a complaint.

Aadhar Review Plea Rejected in a 4:1 Verdict by Supreme Court

The petition seeking the re-examination of the 2018 Aadhar Verdict which declares the Aadhar act constitutional and valid was dismissed by a 5-judge bench in a 4:1 verdict. In January the petitions were considered by a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud, S Abdul Nazeer, Ashok Bhushan, and B R Gavai in the chamber and the order was up on the website on Wednesday.

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

Follow us

A Constitutional Bench held that an investigation would not be unfair or biased solely on the ground that the informant of an offence under the NDPS Act, 1985 is also the investigator of the case. The Bench stated that such matters have to be decided on a case to case basis.

Brief facts of the case

In Mohan Lal v. the State of Punjab reported in (2018) 17 SCC 627, the Supreme Court took a stand that in case the investigation is conducted by the police officer who himself is the complainant, the trial is vitiated and the accused is entitled to acquittal. This view is questioned in the present case. This case was referred to be decided by a larger bench by a Full Bench of this court. Hence, the present Bench was constituted.

Arguments by the Accused

A fair investigation is the very foundation of a fair trial. It is then necessary that the informant and the investigator must not be the same person. The time when the officer under Section 42 of the NDPS Act hands over the person arrested or the goods seized, is the first-time information is received by the “investigating officer”. Only then is the time of commencement of the investigation.

Arguments by the State

There is no bar under Section 156 Cr.P.C. to an officer in charge of a police station to investigate the offence. The competence of such an investigating officer cannot be called in question in any proceedings. Also, under Section 157 Cr.P.C., an officer in charge of a police station who himself receives information of an offence is empowered to investigate the case.

Court’s Observations

The decision in the case of Bhagwan Singh v. the State of Rajasthan (1976) 1 SCC 15, is a decision on its facts. It cannot be said to lay an absolute proposition of law that in no case the informant can be the investigator. The inference of the accused being entitled to acquittal where the informant and the investigating officer is the same, cannot be made.

The Bench clarified that on numerous occasions the Court has convicted the accused even when the complainant and the investigating officer are the same. The question of bias would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. It is a broad and unqualified proposition that investigations would necessarily be unfair or biased. The police officer cannot be barred from the further investigation if he finds a person to have committed a crime.

The bench observed that the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act, 1985, does not lay a procedure that the officers authorized to exercise the powers under Sections 41, 42, 43, and 44 of the Act cannot be the officer in charge for the investigation of the offences. Also, the investigation conducted by the concerned informant was fair or not is to be decided at the time of trial. It is not a judicial approach to distrust and suspects the officer without proven grounds of dishonesty.

The Court relied on the decision in State of Rajasthan v. Ram Chandra, that the question of prejudice has to be established and not inferred. The Court also overruled the decisions including that in Mohan Lal v. the State of Punjab, which states the informant cannot be the investigator and so the accused is entitled to acquittal.

Court’s Decision

The accused is not entitled to be acquitted solely on the ground that the informant is also the investigator of the case. NDPS Act does not specifically bar the complainant to be an investigator. The officer in charge of a police station for the investigation of the offences under the NDPS Act cannot be assumed to be prejudiced.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Supreme Court Upheld “Environmental Rule of Law” in NGT Decision to Demolish Illegal Hotel on Forest Land

This case concerns the dispute relating to the additional construction of hotel-cum-restaurant structure in the Bus Stand Complex along with a bus stand and...

UK Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Policyholders in the COVID-19 Business Interruption Case

The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court finally concluded the long-awaited COVID-19 business interruption case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Hiscox Action...

Kerala High Court Disposes of Writ Petition on Grounds That Reliefs Sought Are Already in Process of Being Granted, Directs State to Complete the...

Excerpt A single-judge bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice Shircy V. gave orders on the writ petition filed by the Petitioner. This writ is filed by...

Supreme Court Directs Government To Provide Free Education To Minor Children of Rape Victims

The Deputy Commissioner of Ranchi was directed by the Supreme Court on Wednesday to make sure that minor children of rape victims are ensured free education till they attain the age of 14 years. The Court made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a woman who claimed that she belonged to the SC/ST group from Jharkhand. She was forced by a man after which her father lodged a complaint.

Aadhar Review Plea Rejected in a 4:1 Verdict by Supreme Court

The petition seeking the re-examination of the 2018 Aadhar Verdict which declares the Aadhar act constitutional and valid was dismissed by a 5-judge bench in a 4:1 verdict. In January the petitions were considered by a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud, S Abdul Nazeer, Ashok Bhushan, and B R Gavai in the chamber and the order was up on the website on Wednesday.

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -