http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: STATE OF WEST BENGAL

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: SUDHIR DEY AND ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT04/12/1984

BENCH: MISRA RANGNATH BENCH: MISRA RANGNATH BHAGWATI, P.N. SEN, AMARENDRA NATH (J)

CITATION:  1985 AIR  195            1985 SCR  (2) 256  1985 SCC  (1) 317        1984 SCALE  (2)942  CITATOR INFO :  RF         1985 SC 735  (4)  RF         1991 SC1260  (42)

ACT:      Constitution of  India, 1950-Art.  136-Criminal special at  Leave   Petition   Judicial   interference   in   police investigation by High Court by appointing Special officer to inquire into  the allegations  of an offence-Special officer already completed  his inquiry-Question  of law  as to  when judicial interference  in investigation  permissible already decided by  Supreme  Court  in  another  case-Whether  leave should be granted on the same point.

HEADNOTE:      The petitioner challenged the order of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court admitting the respondents to bail and also  appointing the  Deputy Inspector  General, Central Bureau of Investigation as a Special officer to inquire into the allegations relating to an offence of murder.      Dismissing the petition, ^      HELD: (1)  A prayer  for Special leave in a bail matter of this  type would  not ordinarily  be entertained  by  the Supreme Court. Therefore, counsel for the petitioner rightly does not  seek to  challenge the  release  on  bail  of  the respondents. [254F]      (2) In  the instant  case, the criminal case itself has in the  meantime been  quashed by  the Calcutta  High Court. State of West Bengal & Ors. etc. v. Sampat Lal & ors. [1982] 2 S.C.R.  256. the legal aspects have been indicated and the principle to  be plied  to a case of this type has also been stated. Keeping  all these  aspects inview  and particularly the fact  that the  Special officer  had made  a eport which indicates that the main fabrics of the allegations are true, Court does  not feel  inclined to  grant leave.  The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed. [255E-E]

JUDGMENT:      CRIMINAL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION Petition  For  special

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

Leave to Appeal (Criminal)No 1454/83      From the  Judgment  and  order  dated  20.6.83  of  the Calcutta      High Court in Criminal Misc. Case No. Nil of 1983 under Sec. 439 of Criminal Procedure Code. 254      Somnath Chatterjee,  HK Puri, S. Chosh and VK Bahl, for the petitioner.      KG Bhagat,  Additional Solicitor General, RN Poddar and Miss Halida Khatoon, for the Union of India.      A.K. Sen,  Sib Das  Banerjee,  Shri  Naraian,  for  the respondent.      Judgment of the Court was delivered.      RANGANATH MISRA,  J.  This  special  leave  application under Article  136 of  the Constitution  is directed against the order  of a  Division Bench  of the  Calcutta High Court dated June  20,1983, admitting  the respondents  to bail and making the following direction:              "Undoubtedly, if the allegations of this nature      are made  against the  responsible officers of the West      Bengal Police,  it will tarnish the image of the entire      police force.  Under the  circumstances we  direct  the      petitioners to  hand over  a copy  of the petition with      its annexures  to the Deputy Inspector General, Central      Bureau of  Investigation, 13  Lindsay Street, Calcutta,      who will  act as  a Special  officer of  this Court and      enquire into  the allegation  made in this petition and      its annexures  and submit  a report to this Court as to      the truth  of the  allegation contained  therein.  This      report must be submitted by 27th June. 1983.      In  the  meantime  we  direct  the  petitioners  to  be released forthwith  on their  executing P.R. Bond of Rs. 250 each."      So far  as the  question of  release  on  bail  of  the respondents is concerned, petitioner’s counsel does not seek to challenge  it. In  fact, a  prayer for special leave in a bail matter of this type would not ordinarily be entertained in this  Court. Challenge,  however, is to the other part of the direction relating to enquiry by the Special officer.      The Special  officer appointed in this case by the High Court has  as a  fact completed  the enquiry  and  sent  his report which  under our  direction has been brought here and we had the advantage of perusing it. The Special officer has found some of the allegations of the respondents to be true. 255      We have  by a  separate  judgment  delivered  today  in Criminal No.  570/83, dealt with the enquiry relating to the death of  two teenagers  by the  names Tirthankar Das Sharma and Sanjib  Chatterjee. Respondent  1, a retired Police Sub- Inspector was  engaged as  an investigating  officer by  the private  detective   agency-The  Secret  Eye.  Respondent  2 happens to be the driver of a motor car of the Ananda Bazaar Patrika, a  leading  newspaper  in  Bengali  published  from Calcutta, which had engaged the private detective agency for the purpose  of investigating  into the  death  of  the  two teenagers. One  Niranjan Ghosh,  Assistant Sub-Inspector  of Police attached  to the  GRP, Bandel,  was concerned  at the initial stage  of the  investigation by  the police into the death of  the two  boys. on account of certain lacuna in the investigation of that case Niranjan Ghosh had been put under suspension. At  that stage  Niranjan Ghosh  and respondent 1 had picked  up acquaintance and respondent 1 had promised to help Niranjan  Ghosh in  preparing a  representation against his suspension.  Lateron some  dispute arose between the two which led  to the  institution of the criminal proceeding in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3  

which bail for respondents became necessary;      The State  of West  Bengal filed  this application  for leave  being   aggrieved  mainly   by  the   direction   for appointment of  a Special  officer. By  our judgment  in the criminal, appeal  reference to  which 13 we have made above, the legal  aspects have  been indicated and the principle to be applied  to a  case of  this type has also been stated We find that  the criminal case itself has in the meantime been quashed by  the  Calcutta  High  Court.  Keeping  all  these aspects in  view and  particularly the fact that the Special officer had  made a  report which  indicates that  the  main fabrics of the allegations are true, we do not feel inclined to grant  leave. This  case does  not require  leave  to  be granted as  the question  of law has already been settled by us in  the judgment  of the  criminal appeal and the factual aspects do  not require  a review  by grant  of  leave.  The application for special leave is accordingly dismissed. M.L.A.                                   Petition dismissed. 256