Karnataka High Court
Mallappa Boraddi vs The Director General Of Police on 3 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:44330
WP No. 11551 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO.11551 OF 2023 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
1. MALLAPPA BORADDI
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/O SUNAG VILLAGE,
BILAGI TALUK
BAGALKOT DISTRICT-587116.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. KULKARNI SHRINATH., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
AMBEDKAR VEEDI NO.2
NRUPATUNGA ROAD
BANGALORE-560001
Digitally signed by (OPPOSITE MATHAS HOSPITAL).
ARUNKUMAR M S
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 2. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
KARNATAKA
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA
BENGALURU-560001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
BENGALURU CITY NO.2
ALI ASKER ROAD,
VASANTH NAGAR
BENGALURU-560051.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:44330
WP No. 11551 of 2023
HC-KAR
4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
CITY RAILWAY POLICE STATION
BENGALURU-560023.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE
REPRESENTATION GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER DATED
23/03/2023 ANNEXURE-D AND FURTHER INVESTIGATE THE
CASE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
Heard Sri. Kulkarni Shrinath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State.
2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the 'B' Report, dated 21.10.2023, in Crime No.12 of 2023 on the file of 41st Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate -3- NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR Court, Bangalore, inter-alia, sought for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation dated 23.03.2023 produced at Annexure-D to the writ petition inter-alia sought for re-investigation by a independent agency in accordance with law.
3. Relevant facts for the adjudication of this writ petition are that, on 23.02.2023, FIR came to be registered by the respondent No.4 in Crime No. 12 of 2023 for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC, based on the complaint filed by one Smt. Girijamma Boreddy, wife of the deceased- Shankarappa Boreddy. In the said proceedings, one Nandini, resident of Bangalore has been shown as accused. It is also forthcoming from the complaint filed by Smt. Girijamma Boreddy that, on 22.02.2023, around 10 a.m, she received a message, from the Police that her husband's body is lying on the railway track, within the limits of Bangalore City Police and thereafter, taken to the hospital. Immediately, complainant rushed to the hospital and identified dead -4- NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR body as her husband. It is also forthcoming that, the husband of the complainant-Shankarappa Boreddy, had left death notes, which were produced before the Investigation Officer, wherein, it is stated that deceased has borrowed personal loans from ICICI bank, and IDBI bank to the tune of Rs.28 lakhs and deceased has lended it to said Smt. Nandini. It is also averred in the writ petition that, the proceedings before the competent Criminal Court came to be closed based on the 'B' report filed by the respondent-Police. Hence, the petitioner being brother of the deceased-Shankarappa Boreddy, seeks re-
investigation of the case.
4. I have carefully examined the entire records produced by the learned Additional Government Advocate with regard to the investigation being conducted by the City Railway Police in Crime No.12 of 2023, for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC, which is not a compoundable offence, however, based on the statement made by the complainant, the respondent-Police -5- NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR authorities have filed 'B' report and same was accepted by the Trial Court, which is impermissible in law. Therefore, I am of the opinion that, taking into consideration the averments made in the writ petition, which requires a detailed investigation by an independent agency other than the respondent No.4, and that apart, since, the entire case came to be closed abruptly based on the statement made by the complainant therein, the Trial Court could not have closed the case based on the 'B' report filed by the respondent No.4 as the offence alleged in the case is punishable under Section 306 of IPC.
5. It is settled principle in law that normally this Court, while excising jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India restrained from transfer the investigation or re-investigation or further investigation and interfere be limited and used sparingly unless to do complete justice and to ensure that there is no violation of fundamental rights. It is to be noted that in the present case the respondent- police filed 'B' report before the Trial -6- NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR Court in which the offences punishable under Section 306 of IPC, which is impermissible in law, and therefore, to do compete justice and to enforce the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India, I feel that the investigation be made over to State Investigating Agency-
CID.
6. It is relevant to cite the judgment in the case of Pooja Pal vs. Union of India and Others reported in (2016) 3 SCC 135, wherein paragraphs 50 to 75 held as follows:
"50. The authorities cited at the Bar present the precedential spectrum of the curial jurisprudence in the context of entrustment of investigation to an instrumentality other than the local/State police agencies.
51. In Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] , commonly adverted to as "Best Bakery Case" on the theme, the aspects of perfunctory and partisan role of the investigating agency as well as improper conduct of the trial involved by the Public Prosecutor surfaced for -7- NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR scrutiny. Though the trial was over resulting in acquittal of the accused persons mainly as the purported eyewitnesses had resiled from the statements made by them under Section 161 CrPC (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Code") during the investigation coupled with faulty and biased investigation and laconical trial, this Court responded to the request for a fresh trial made by the State and one of the eyewitnesses, Zahira. It was pleaded, inter alia, that when a large number of witnesses have turned hostile, it ought to raise a reasonable suspicion that they were being threatened or coerced. Apart from alleging that the prosecution did not take steps to protect the star witnesses, it was contended as well that the trial court had failed to exercise its power under Section 311 of the Code to recall and re-examine them as their testimony was essential to unearth the truth and record a just decision in the case.
52. The casual decision of the Public Prosecutor in Zahira Habibulla Sheikh case [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] to drop a material witness, a measure approved by the trial court, also came to be criticised. The lapse of non-examination of the injured eyewitnesses, who were kept away from the trial, was also highlighted. It was alleged that the -8- NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR partisan witnesses had been examined to favour the accused persons resulting in a denial of fair trial.
53. This Court in the above disquieting backdrop in Zahira Habibulla Sheikh case [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] , did underline that discovery, vindication and establishment of truth were the avowed purposes underlying the existence of the courts of justice. Apart from indicating that the principles of a fair trial permeate the common law in both civil and criminal contexts, this Court underscored the necessity of a delicate judicial balancing of the competing interests in a criminal trial--the interests of the accused and the public and to a great extent that too of the victim, at the same time not losing the sight of public interest involved in the prosecution of persons who commit offences.
54. It was propounded in Zahira Habibulla case [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] that in a criminal case, the fate of the proceedings cannot always be left entirely in the hands of the parties, crimes being public wrongs in breach and violation of public rights and duties, which affect the whole community and are harmful to the society in general.
That the concept of fair trial entails the triangulation of the interest of the accused, the victim, society and -9- NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR that the community acts through the State and the prosecuting agency was authoritatively stated. This Court observed that the interests of the society are not to be treated completely with disdain and as persona non grata. It was remarked as well that due administration of justice is always viewed as a continuous process, not confined to the determination of a particular case so much so that a court must cease to be a mute spectator and a mere recording machine but become a participant in the trial evincing intelligence and active interest and elicit all relevant materials necessary for reaching the correct conclusion, to find out the truth and administer justice with fairness and impartiality both to the parties and to the community.
55. In Zahira Habibulla case [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] while highlighting the courts' overriding duty to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice, it was enunciated as well that they cannot turn a blind eye to vexatious and oppressive conduct, discernable in relation to the proceedings. That the principles of rule of law and due process are closely linked with human rights protection, guaranteeing a fair trial, primarily aimed at ascertaining the truth, was stated. It was held as well that the society at large and the victims or their family members and relatives have an inbuilt right to
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR be dealt fairly in a criminal trial and the denial thereof is as much injustice to the accused as to the victim and the society.
56. Dwelling upon the uncompromising significance and the worth of witnesses in the perspective of a fair trial, the following revealing comments of Bentham were extracted in para 41 :
(Zahira Habibulla case [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] , SCC pp. 187-88) "41. 'Witnesses', as Bentham said : are the eyes and ears of justice. Hence, the importance and primacy of the quality of trial process. If the witness himself is incapacitated from acting as eyes and ears of justice, the trial gets putrefied and paralysed, and it no longer can constitute a fair trial. The incapacitation may be due to several factors like the witness being not in a position for reasons beyond control to speak the truth in the court or due to negligence or ignorance or some corrupt collusion. Time has become ripe to act on account of numerous experiences faced by courts on account of frequent turning of witnesses as hostile, either due to threats, coercion, lures and monetary considerations at the instance of those in power, their henchmen and hirelings, political clout and patronage and innumerable other
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR corrupt practices ingeniously adopted to smother and stifle truth and realities coming out to surface rendering truth and justice to become ultimate casualties. Broader public and societal interests require that the victims of the crime who are not ordinarily parties to prosecution and the interests of State represented by their prosecuting agencies do not suffer even in slow process but irreversibly and irretrievably, which if allowed would undermine and destroy public confidence in the administration of justice, which may ultimately pave way for anarchy, oppression and injustice resulting in complete breakdown and collapse of the edifice of rule of law, enshrined and jealously guarded and protected by the Constitution. There comes the need for protecting the witness. Time has come when serious and undiluted thoughts are to be bestowed for protecting witnesses so that ultimate truth is presented before the court and justice triumphs and that the trial is not reduced to a mockery. The State has a definite role to play in protecting the witnesses, to start with at least in sensitive cases involving those in power, who have political patronage and could wield muscle and money power, to avert the trial getting tainted and derailed and truth becoming a casualty. As a protector of its citizens it has to ensure that during a trial in court the witness
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR could safely depose the truth without any fear of being haunted by those against whom he has deposed."
(emphasis supplied)
57. It was underlined in Zahira Habibulla case [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] that if ultimately the truth is to be arrived at, the eyes and ears of justice have to be protected so that the interest of justice do not get incapacitated in the sense of making the proceedings before the courts, mere mock trials. While elucidating that a court ought to exercise its powers under Section 311 of the Code and Section 165 of the Evidence Act judicially and with circumspection, it was held that such invocation ought to be only to subserve the cause of justice and the public interest by eliciting evidence in aid of a just decision and to uphold the truth. It was proclaimed that though justice is depicted to be blindfolded, it is only a veil not to see who the party before it is, while pronouncing judgment on the cause brought before it by enforcing the law and administer justice and not to ignore or turn the attention away from the truth of the cause or the lis before it, in disregard of its duty to prevent miscarriage of justice. That any indifference, inaction or lethargy displayed in protecting the right of an
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR ordinary citizen, more particularly when a grievance is expressed against the mighty administration, would erode the public faith in the judicial system was underlined. It was highlighted that the courts exist to do justice to the persons who are affected and therefore they cannot afford to get swayed by the abstract technicalities and close their eyes to the factors which need to be positively probed and noticed. The following statement in Jennison v. Baker [Jennison v. Baker, (1972) 2 QB 52 : (1972) 2 WLR 429 : (1972) 1 All ER 997 (CA)] , was recalled : (QB p. 66) "... 'The law should not be seen to sit by limply, while those who defy it go free, and those who seek its protection lose hope.'"
58. It was declared in Zahira Habibulla case [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] that the courts have to ensure that the accused persons are punished and that the might or the authority of the State is not used to shield themselves and their men and it should be ensured that they do not wield such powers, which under the Constitution has to be held only in trust for the public and society at large. That if any deficiency in investigation or prosecution is visible or can be perceived by lifting the veil covering such deficiency, the courts have to deal with the
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR same with an iron hand appropriately within the framework of law, was underlined.
59. Referring to its earlier decision in Karnel Singh v. State of M.P. [Karnel Singh v. State of M.P., (1995) 5 SCC 518 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 977] , it was reiterated that in a case of a defective investigation, the court has to be circumspect in evaluating the evidence and may have to adopt an active and analytical role to ensure that truth is found by having recourse to Section 311 of the Code or at a later stage also resorting to Section 391 instead of throwing hands in the air in despair. It recalled as well its observations in Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar [Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar, (1998) 4 SCC 517 : 1998 SCC (Cri) 1085] that the courts are installed for justice-oriented mission and thus, if a negligent investigation or omissions or lapses due to perfunctory investigation are not effectively rectified, the faith and confidence of the people would be shaken in the law-enforcing agency and also in the institution devised for administration of justice.
60. Though, as referred to hereinabove, trial was completed and the accused persons were acquitted, in the textual facts, this Court in Zahira Habibulla case [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] did direct retrial as prayed for, to avoid subversion of the
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR justice delivery system and ordered the investigating agency or those supervising the investigation to act in terms of Section 173(8) of the Code as the circumstances would so warrant.
61. The observations and the propositions, though made in the backdrop of a request for retrial, those pertaining to the essentiality of a fair and complete investigation and trial as well as the solemn duty of the courts to ensure the discernment of truth to administer even handed justice as institutions of trust of public faith and confidence, are in our estimate, of universal application and binding effect, transcending the factual settings of a case. An adverse deduction vis-à-vis the quality of investigation and a trial trivialising the cause of justice, is however the essential prerequisite, for such remedial intervention by way of further investigation, reinvestigation, additional evidence, retrial, etc. to be made objectively but assuredly for the furtherance of the salutary objectives of the justice dispensing system as contemplated in law, it being of paramount pre-eminence.
62. This Court in Mohd. Hussain [Mohd. Hussain v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2012) 9 SCC 408 : (2012) 3 SCC (Cri) 1139] was also seized of a situation imploring for a retrial following the termination of the prosecution principally on account
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR of delay, when juxtaposed to the demand for justice in cases involving grave crimes affecting the society at large. The offence involved was under Sections 302/307/120-B IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and had perpetrated an explosion in a passenger carrying bus. This Court amongst others recalled its observations in Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab [Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, (1994) 3 SCC 569 : 1994 SCC (Cri) 899] that while dispensing justice, the courts should keep in mind not only the liberty of the accused but also the interest of the victim and their near and dear ones and above all the collective interest of the community and the safety of the nation, so that the public may not lose faith in the system of judicial administration and indulge in private retribution. It, however, also took note of its ruling in State of M.P. v. Bhooraji [State of M.P. v. Bhooraji, (2001) 7 SCC 679 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 1373] that (SCC p. 685, para 8) a de novo trial should be the last resort and that too only when such a course becomes desperately indispensable and should be limited to the extreme exigency to avert a failure of justice. It noted with approval the observation in P. Ramachandra Rao [P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 4 SCC 578 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 830] that it is neither advisable nor feasible nor judicially permissible to draw or prescribe an outer limit for
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR conclusion of all criminal proceedings and that the criminal courts are not obliged to terminate the trial or criminal proceedings merely on account of lapse of time. That such time-limits cannot and will not by themselves be treated by any court as a bar to further continuance of the trial or proceedings or to terminate the same and acquit or discharge the accused, was emphatically underlined. Reference too was made of the decision in Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] .
63. Vis-à-vis the notions of "speedy trial" and "fair trial" as the integral constituents of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it was observed in Mohd. Hussain case [Mohd. Hussain v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2012) 9 SCC 408 : (2012) 3 SCC (Cri) 1139] that there was a qualitative difference between the right to speedy trial and the right of the accused to fair trial. While pointing out that unlike the accused's right of fair trial, the deprivation of the right to speedy trial does not per se prejudice the accused in defending himself, it was proclaimed that mere lapse of several years since the commencement of prosecution by itself, would not justify the discontinuance of prosecution or dismissal of the indictment. It was stated in no uncertain terms that the factors concerning the accused's right to speedy trial have to be counterpoised with the
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR impact of the crime on the society and the confidence of the people in the judicial system. It was noted that speedy trial secures rights to an accused but it does not preclude the rights of public justice. It was exposited that the nature and gravity of the crime, persons involved, social impact and societal needs must be weighed along with the right of the accused to speedy trial and if the balance tilts in favour of the former, the long delay in conclusion of trial should not operate against the continuation of the prosecution but if the right of the accused in the facts and circumstances of the case and the exigencies or situation leans the balance in his favour, the prosecution may be brought to end. It was held that the guiding factor for a retrial essentially has to be the demand of justice. It was emphasised that while protecting the right of an accused to fair trial and due process of law, the interest of the public at large who seek protection of law ought not to be altogether overlooked so much so, that it results in loss of hope in the legal system. Retrial in the facts of the case was ordered.
64. The content and scope of the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct investigation by CBI in a cognizable offence, alleged to have taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of the State, without the consent of the State Government fell for scrutiny of this Court
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR in Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights [State of W.B. v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, (2010) 3 SCC 571 : (2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 401] . While examining the issue in the context of the power of judicial review as embedded in the constitutional scheme, it was held that no Act of Parliament could exclude or curtail the powers of the constitutional courts in that regard. Reiterating, that the power of judicial review is an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution, it was underlined that the same was essential to give a pragmatic content to the objectives of the Constitution embodied in Part III and other parts thereof. In elaboration, it was held that Article 21 of the Constitution not only takes within its fold, the enforcement of the rights of the accused but also the rights of the victim. It was predicated that the State has a duty to enforce the human rights of the citizens providing for fair and impartial investigation, against any person accused of commission of any cognizable offence.
65. Referring to Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, it was ruled in Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights case [State of W.B. v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, (2010) 3 SCC 571 : (2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 401] that any restriction imposed thereby could not be construed to be one on the powers of the
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR constitutional courts and thus cannot be taken away or curtailed or diluted thereby. While proclaiming the supervening powers of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct entrustment of the investigation to CBI as in the case involved, this Court sounded a caveat as well that the very plenitude of such power inheres a great caution in its exercise and though no inflexible guidelines can be laid down in that regard, the same has to be invoked sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situation when it becomes necessary to provide credibility and to instil confidence in the investigation or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights.
(emphasis supplied)
66. The facts in Bharati Tamang [Bharati Tamang v. Union of India, (2013) 15 SCC 578 :
(2014) 6 SCC (Cri) 566] seeking de novo investigation, present somewhat an identical fact situation. The appellant's husband, President of a political party was brutally murdered in public view and in the presence of police and security personnel, by the supporters of the rival party. The investigation into the sordid incident had been completed. Alleging that the probe initially held by the State Police and
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR thereafter by CID and by CBI were faulty, the prayer for de novo inquisition was made. Imputation of attempts by the prosecution to suppress the truth in spite of the fact that the assailants were identified and named in the FIR and that the incident was in effectuation of a deep-rooted conspiracy and preceded by previous threats were made. CBI in its pleadings, inter alia, cited:
(i) prevailing law and order situation in the town;
(ii) abscondence of most of the accused persons;
(iii) murder of its informants;
(iv) fear psychosis in the locality and resultant want of support from the local public as hindrances to its investigation.
67. In Bharati Tamang case [Bharati Tamang v. Union of India, (2013) 15 SCC 578 :
(2014) 6 SCC (Cri) 566] on behalf of the appellant, accusation of tardy prosecution of the case, and free and open movement of the key accused persons in the city avoiding arrest were made as well. The plea of the impleaded accused persons that the appellant after the demise of her husband had initiated the writ proceedings for political gain was rejected. Their contention based on Section 319 of the Code that in course of the trial, on availability of sufficient evidence, any person not being an accused could be ordered to be tried, was also negated. The
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR propositions expounded in Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 999] qua the duty of the court to ensure fair investigation by remedying the deficiencies and defaults therein so as to bring forth full and material facts to prevent miscarriage of justice were reiterated. It was concluded that when the courts find extraordinary or exceptional circumstances rendering reinvestigation imperative, in such eventualities even de novo investigation can be ordered. While ruling that in case of discernable deficiency in investigation or prosecution, the courts have to deal with the same with iron hand appropriately within the framework of law, it was underlined that in appropriate cases, even if charge-sheet was filed, it was open for the High Court and also this Court to direct investigation of the case to be handed over to CBI or to any other agency or to direct investigation de novo in order to do complete justice, in the facts of the case.
68. Noticing that certain transcripts of some conversations relating to the incident intercepted by CBI were awaiting analysis by the forensic agency as a part of the investigation, this Court in Bharati Tamang case [Bharati Tamang v. Union of India, (2013) 15 SCC 578 : (2014) 6 SCC (Cri) 566] in the ultimate, transferred the case beyond the territorial limits of the district involved and directed that the
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR probe be carried out by CBI to be monitored by its Joint Director as named. It was ordered that CBI would ensure that all required evidence is gathered by leaving no stone unturned, so that all accused involved in the offence are brought for trial to be dealt with in accordance with law. The trial that had meanwhile commenced was kept in abeyance pending conclusion of the further investigation by CBI and the submission of report before the transferred court as ordered. Not only in issuing these directions this Court revisited the imperatives bearing on the duty of the Court to ensure that criminal prosecution is carried out effectively and the perpetrators of the crime are duly punished by the appropriate court of law, it noticed as well some of the factual features of the case, namely:
(i) The deceased at his death was the President of a political party.
(ii) There was a deep-rooted rivalry between his party and another party.
(iii) The deceased had organised a meeting of his party on the date of the incident.
(iv) Police personnel were present at the place of the occurrence. Though present, no report thereof was registered immediately thereafter.
(v) Wide coverage of the incident by the media.
- 24 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR
(vi) Availability of the transcripts of the intercepted conversations of some of the accused persons and the office-bearers of the rival political party.
69. This Court in Babubhai [Babubhai v. State of Gujarat, (2010) 12 SCC 254 : (2011) 1 SCC (Cri) 336] while examining the scope of Section 173(8) of the Code, did recall its observations in Manu Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi) [Manu Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2010) 6 SCC 1 :
(2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 1385] that it is not only the responsibility of the investigating agency but as well as of the courts to ensure that investigation is fair and does not in any way hamper the freedom of an individual except in accordance with law. It underlined that the equally enforceable canon of criminal law is that high responsibility lies upon the investigating agency, not to conduct an investigation in a tainted and unfair manner and that such a drill should not, prima facie, be indicative of a biased mind and every effort should be made to bring the guilty to law dehors his position and influence in the society as nobody stands above law. It propounded that the word "ordinarily" applied under Section 173(8) of the Code, did attest that if the investigation is unfair and deliberately incomplete and has been done in a manner with an object of helping a party, the court may direct normally for
- 25 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR further investigation, and not for reinvestigation. It was, however, added as a sequitur that in exceptional circumstances, the court in order to prevent the miscarriage of criminal justice, and if it is considered necessary, may direct for de novo investigation as well. It was observed that if an investigation has not been conducted fairly, the resultant charge-sheet would be invalid. It was held as well that such investigation would ultimately prove to be a precursor of miscarriage of criminal justice and the court in such a contingency would be left to guess or conjecture, as the whole truth would not be forthcoming to it. It was held that fair investigation is a part of the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India and thus, the investigating agency cannot be permitted to conduct an investigation in a tainted or biased manner. It was emphasised that where non-interference of the court would ultimately result in failure of justice, the court must interfere and in the interest of justice choose an independent agency to make a fresh investigation.
70. In Rubabbuddin Sheikh [Rubabbuddin Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2010) 2 SCC 200 :
(2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 1006] as well, though as many as eight action reports had been submitted by the State Police on the incident of reported murder of the
- 26 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR brother of the petitioner in a fake encounter and the disappearance of his sister-in-law in which, amongst other, allegedly the anti-terrorist squad of the State Police was involved, a proceeding was initiated on the basis of a letter addressed to the Chief Justice of India seeking a direction for investigation by CBI. In view of the rival contentions advanced as to the permissibility or otherwise of the transfer of the investigation as prayed for, this Court on an in-depth audit of the decisions rendered by it, did negate the plea that subsequent to the submission of a charge- sheet, the court is not empowered in any case whatsoever to hand over the investigation to an independent agency like CBI. It was held, having regard to the parameters outlined by the two sets of authorities on the issue, that such a course, however, would be permissible in an appropriate case where the facts bearing thereon would demonstrate lack of proper investigation and vitiations thereof by factual discrepancies endorsing such a deduction. The aspect that accusations in the contextual facts were directed against the local police personnel in which high police officials of the State had been made accused also did weigh with the determination. The view taken in Gudalure M.J. Cherian [Gudalure M.J. Cherian v. Union of India, (1992) 1 SCC 397] that though ordinarily, after the investigation is completed by the police and charge-
- 27 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR sheet is submitted to the court, the investigation ought not to be reopened by entrusting the same to a specialised agency like CBI, nevertheless in a given situation, to do justice between the parties and to instil confidence in the public mind it may be warranted, was noted with approval. The overriding imperative of permitting transfer of investigation to CBI was thus, acknowledged to be in the advancement of the cause of justice and to instil confidence in the mind of the victims as well as the public.
71. The renderings in Hussainara Khatoon [Hussainara Khatoon (1) v. State of Bihar, (1980) 1 SCC 81 : 1980 SCC (Cri) 23] , A.R. Antulay [Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, (1992) 1 SCC 225 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 93] , P. Ramachandra Rao [P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 4 SCC 578 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 830] , Vakil Prasad [Vakil Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar, (2009) 3 SCC 355 : (2009) 2 SCC (Cri) 95] , Sampat Lal [State of W.B. v. Sampat Lal, (1985) 1 SCC 317 :
1985 SCC (Cri) 62] , Babubhai [Babubhai v. State of Gujarat, (2010) 12 SCC 254 : (2011) 1 SCC (Cri) 336] and Common Cause [Common Cause v. Union of India, (1999) 6 SCC 667 : 1999 SCC (Cri) 1196] have been pressed into service on behalf of Respondents 4 and 5 to highlight the demand of speedy trial as a mandate of the fundamental right to
- 28 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. While emphasising that speedy trial is the essence of criminal justice and any delay constitutes denial thereof, it has been propounded therein, that any procedure which does not ensure a quick trial cannot be regarded as reasonable, fair or just and would fly in the face of such cherished constitutional promise. While observing that the right to speedy trial encompasses all the stages, namely, investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, revision and retrial, it was however noted in P. Ramachandra Rao [P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 4 SCC 578 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 830] that no guidelines for a speedy trial can be intended to be applied as hard rules or a straitjacket formula and that their application would depend on the fact situation of each case, which is difficult to foresee, so much so that no generalisation can be made. It was expounded as well in Sampat Lal [State of W.B. v. Sampat Lal, (1985) 1 SCC 317 : 1985 SCC (Cri) 62] that in spite of the procedure laid down in the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, a court, in a given case, if is satisfied that the statutory agency has not functioned in an effective way or that the circumstances are such that it may reasonably be presumed or inferred that it may not be able to conduct the investigation fairly or
- 29 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR impartially, the court may reasonably consider to supplement the procedure.
72. While recalling its observation in State of Bihar v. J.A.C. Saldanha [State of Bihar v. J.A.C. Saldanha, (1980) 1 SCC 554 : 1980 SCC (Cri) 272] , that on a cognizance of the offence being taken by the court, the police function of investigation comes to an end subject to the provision contained in Section 173(8) of the Code and that the adjudicatory function of the judiciary commences, thus delineating the well-demarcated functions of crime detection and adjudication, this Court in Sampat Lal case [State of W.B. v. Sampat Lal, (1985) 1 SCC 317 : 1985 SCC (Cri) 62] did recognise a residuary jurisdiction to give directions to the investigating agency, if satisfied that the requirements of law were not being complied with and that the investigation was not being conducted properly or with due haste and promptitude.
73. It was reiterated in Babubhai [Babubhai v. State of Gujarat, (2010) 12 SCC 254 : (2011) 1 SCC (Cri) 336] that in exceptional circumstances, the Court in order to prevent the miscarriage of criminal justice, may direct investigation de novo, if it is satisfied that non- interference would ultimately result in failure of justice. In such an eventuality endorsement of the
- 30 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR investigation to an independent agency to make a fresh probe may be well merited. That not only fair trial but fair investigation is also a part of the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India and therefore, investigation ought to be fair, transparent and judicious, was re-emphasised. The expression "ordinarily" as used in Section 173(8) of the Code was noted again to rule that in exceptional circumstances, however, in order to prevent miscarriage of criminal justice, a court may still direct investigation de novo.
74. The above postulations being strikingly common in all these decisions, do pervade the fabric and the content thereof and thus dilation of individual facts has been avoided.
75. That the extraordinary power of the constitutional courts under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution of India qua the issuance of direction to CBI to conduct investigation must be exercised with great caution, was underlined in Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights [State of W.B. v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, (2010) 3 SCC 571 : (2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 401] as adverted to hereinabove. Observing that although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down in this regard, it was highlighted that such an order cannot
- 31 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR be passed as a matter of routine or merely because the party has levelled some allegations against the local police and can be invoked in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigation or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and for enforcing the fundamental rights."
7. It is also relevant to cite judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Mandakini Diwan and Another vs. High Court of Chhattisgarh and Others reported in (2024) 10 SCC 560 wherein, paragraphs 20 to 23 held as follows:
"20. In Awungshi Chirmayo v. State (NCT of Delhi) [Awungshi Chirmayo v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2024) 10 SCC 568] this Court directed CBI to hold enquiry in the criminal matter related to murder of two cousins due to certain puzzling facts including inconclusive post-mortem report. It held as follows:
(SCC pp. 572-73, paras 14-18) "14. In a seminal judgment reported as State of W.B. v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights [State of W.B. v. Committee for Protection
- 32 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR of Democratic Rights, (2010) 3 SCC 571 : (2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 401] , this Court has discussed in detail inter alia the circumstances under which the constitutional courts would be empowered to issue directions for CBI enquiry to be made. This Court noted that the power to transfer investigation should be used sparingly, however, it could be used for doing complete justice and ensuring there is no violation of fundamental rights. This is what the Court said in para 70: (SCC p. 602) '70. ... Insofar as the question of issuing a direction to CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights.'
- 33 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR
15. The powers of this Court for directing further investigation regardless of the stage of investigation are extremely wide. This can be done even if the charge-sheet has been submitted by the prosecuting agency. In Bharati Tamang v. Union of India [Bharati Tamang v. Union of India, (2013) 15 SCC 578 :
(2014) 6 SCC (Cri) 566] , this Court allowed the writ petition filed by the widow of late Madan Tamang who was killed during a political clash and directed investigation by CBI which would be monitored by the Joint Director, CBI. The following observations were made in para 44:
(SCC p. 601) '44. ... Whether it be due to political rivalry or personal vengeance or for that matter for any other motive a murder takes place, it is the responsibility of the police to come up to the expectation of the public at large and display that no stone will remain unturned to book the culprits and bring them for trial for being dealt with under the provisions of the criminal law of prosecution. Any slackness displayed in that process will not be in the interest of the public at large and therefore as has been pointed out by this Court in the various decisions, which we have referred to in the earlier paragraphs, we find that it is our responsibility to ensure that the prosecution
- 34 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR agency is reminded of its responsibility and duties in the discharge of its functions effectively and efficiently and ensure that the criminal prosecution is carried on effectively and the perpetrators of crime are duly punished by the appropriate court of law.'
16. This Court has expressed its strong views about the need of Courts to be alive to genuine grievances brought before it by ordinary citizens as has been held in Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat [Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 :
2004 SCC (Cri) 999] .
17. It is to observe that unresolved crimes tend to erode public trust in institutions which have been established for maintaining law and order. Criminal investigation must be both fair and effective. We say nothing on the fairness of the investigation appears to us, but the fact that it has been ineffective is self-evident. The kith and kin of the deceased who live far away in Manipur have a real logistical problem while approaching authorities in Delhi, yet they have their hope alive, and have shown trust and confidence in this system. We are therefore of the considered view that this case needs to be handed over to CBI, for a proper investigation and also to remove any
- 35 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR doubts in the minds of the appellants, and to bring the real culprits to justice.
18. In view of the discussion made above, the order of the Delhi High Court dated 18-5-2018 [Awungshi Chirmayo v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2018 SCC OnLine Del 9123] , dismissing the prayer of the present appellants to transfer the investigation to CBI is hereby set aside. The appeal is hereby allowed and we direct that CBI to hold enquiry in the matter. The case shall be transferred from SIT to CBI. The SIT, which has so far conducted the investigation in the matter, will hand over all the relevant papers and documents to CBI for investigation. After a thorough investigation, CBI will submit its complete investigation report or charge-sheet before the court concerned as expeditiously as possible."
21. It is true that power to direct CBI to conduct investigation is to be exercised sparingly and such orders should not be passed in a routine manner. In the present case, the aggrieved party has raised allegations of bias and undue influence on the police machinery of the State of Chhattisgarh. Coupled with the fact that the thorough, fair and independent investigation needs to be carried out to find out the truth about the whole incident and in particular about
- 36 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR the ante-mortem injuries. We are of the view that such a direction needs to be issued in the present case.
22. We accordingly allow this appeal, set aside the impugned order [Mandakini Diwan v. High Court of Chhattisgarh, 2023 SCC OnLine Chh 1441] passed by the High Court and further direct CBI Respondent 8 to carry out complete and fair investigation and proceed in accordance to law into the incident and that too expeditiously considering the fact that the incident is of 2016 and submit a report to this Court. If CBI finds that an FIR needs to be registered, it may itself do so and proceed accordingly and bring such complaint to a logical conclusion.
23. However, if CBI comes to the conclusion that there is no material which it could collect which is not sufficient in ordinary course to submit a charge- sheet, it would close the proceedings. The State of Chhattisgarh is directed to extend all cooperation to CBI in conducting the investigation and provide all necessary papers and other strategic support to CBI as may be required."
8. Recently Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sukdeb Saha vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others
- 37 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 1515 paragraphs 17 to 22 held as follows:
"17. At the outset, we may like to note that the power to transfer an investigation to the CBI is not to be exercised as a matter of course. This Court has consistently held that such a course of action is exceptional and the extraordinary jurisdiction should be invoked to this end only in rare and compelling circumstances where the interest of justice so demands. A Constitution Bench in State of West Bengal v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal (CPDR)20 , examined the circumstances under which Constitutional Courts may invoke their jurisdiction to direct a CBI investigation. The Court held that such extraordinary jurisdiction may be invoked to ensure a fair and impartial investigation where State machinery appears to be ineffective, biased, or complicit. The relevant paragraph of the judgment is extracted below:
"70. Before parting with the case, we deem it necessary to emphasise that despite wide powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these constitutional powers. The very plenitude of the power under the said articles requires great
- 38 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR caution in its exercise. Insofar as the question of issuing a direction to CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations."
(Emphasis Supplied)
18. This Court in the case of Arnab Ranjan Goswami v. Union of India (supra), held that:
"52. [.]. An individual under investigation has a legitimate expectation of a fair process which accords
- 39 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR with law. The displeasure of an accused person about the manner in which the investigation proceeds or an unsubstantiated allegation (as in the present case) of a conflict of interest against the police conducting the investigation must not derail the legitimate course of law and warrant the invocation of the extraordinary power of this Court to transfer an investigation to CBI. Courts assume the extraordinary jurisdiction to transfer an investigation in exceptional situations to ensure that the sanctity of the administration of criminal justice is preserved. While no inflexible guidelines are laid down, the notion that such a transfer is an "extraordinary power" to be used "sparingly" and "in exceptional circumstances"
comports with the idea that routine transfers would belie not just public confidence in the normal course of law but also render meaningless the extraordinary situations that warrant the exercise of the power to transfer the investigation. .
19. The settled principle of law that emerges from the abovementioned decisions is that the power to transfer the investigation of a criminal case to the CBI is an extraordinary measure, which must be exercised with great caution, and only in rare and exceptional circumstances. This jurisdiction is not to be invoked lightly or in a routine manner, but only where the facts of the case disclose a compelling
- 40 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR necessity to ensure fairness in investigation, preservation of public confidence in the administration of justice, and protection of fundamental rights of the parties involved. In examining the prayer made by an aggrieved person seeking transfer of investigation to the CBI, the Court must necessarily be guided by the strict parameters laid down in binding precedents.
20. These parameters inter alia include, instances where the State police authorities appear to be biased or complicit, where the investigation has been tainted by delay, irregularity, or suppression of material facts, or where the complexity and inter- state ramifications of the matter necessitate the involvement of a central agency.
21. In the present case, while we refrain from commenting on the fairness of the investigation conducted thus far, the ineffectiveness of the local police officials is clear and undeniable. The following compelling factors, when considered together, conclusively demonstrate the failure of the local investigation and highlight the imminent need for an impartial investigation by the CBI:
21.1. The attempt of the respondents to paint the unfortunate incident as one of suicide, relying upon vague references to the deceased being
- 41 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR "agitated" on the evening of 14th July, 2023, is wholly unsubstantiated. The original and consistent version disclosed to the appellant, both by Aakash Institute's personnel and local police, was that the appellant's daughter had fallen from the terrace. At no point was the suicide theory mentioned to the appellant in real time, either orally or through any written communication. It is only in hindsight that respondents have sought to paint the deceased as mentally perturbed. If this was truly a case of suicide, it is inexplicable that no suicide note was recovered, no psychological history was documented, and no statements of her friends, classmates or roommates were recorded to establish any alleged suicidal tendencies. Moreover, no medical or psychiatric records have been produced to support such a claim. The belated and unsubstantiated narrative of suicide appears to be a post-facto justification aimed at diluting the gravity of the incident and shielding institutional lapses.
21.2. A description of the CCTV footage collected by the Advocate Commissioner (in the report) reveals glaring contradictions that remain unaddressed by the investigating agency. The footage from Sadhana Hostel shows a girl walking up the stairs at around 10 : 25 pm on 14th July
- 42 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR 2023, wearing a salwar/trousers and a T-shirt. In stark contrast, the footage of around 10 : 46 pm from the adjacent building, i.e., Sanghvi Lamination shop, which allegedly captures the fall, shows a girl dressed in blue half-pants and a t-shirt. This fundamental inconsistency has not been reconciled by the Investigating Officers. No attempt whatsoever has been made to verify whether the girl who was seen going upstairs was none other than the deceased (Ms. X) who was found lying on the floor. No forensic/DNA analysis or witness identification has been attempted. This discrepancy severely undermines the credibility of the claim that the deceased herself went upstairs and jumped off the terrace.
21.3. The respondents' claim that the young girl (Ms. X) was in an irreversible critical state from the moment of the fall stands completely contradicted by their own records, the AIIMS Medical Board Report, and independent evidence on record. While the Investigation Officer, Sadhana Hostel and the Venkataramana Hospital have categorically taken a stand that the young girl (Ms. X) was unconscious when brought to the hospital, the AIIMS Medical Board has clearly noted that the young girl (Ms. X) was admitted to the hospital in a conscious and irritable state,
- 43 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR with a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 10/15, indicating that she was neurologically responsive at the time of admission. This observation of the AIIMS Medical Board is further corroborated by the statement of the appellant, who stated that at approximately 1 : 15 am on 15th July, 2023, his friend saw the young girl (Ms. X) moving and verbally asking for water, a clear indication of retained consciousness and lucidity. Despite this, when the appellant arrived at Venkataramana Hospital later that day, he found that his daughter was placed on a ventilator. No consent, written or oral, was obtained from the appellant, any family member, or a responsible person prior to this critical medical intervention. Furthermore, at no point was the appellant or even his friend, who was physically present in Visakhapatnam, informed about the occurrence of a heart attack or deterioration of Ms. X's condition during the night. If the deceased was indeed conscious, there was sufficient time and opportunity to record her statement, which would have been crucial in uncovering the circumstances surrounding the incident. The failure to do so, despite the documented conscious state of Ms. X, reflects not only gross medical negligence but also a possible suppression of key evidence that could have aided the unravelling of the truth.
- 44 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR 21.4. A deeply troubling and questionable aspect of the present case is the consolidation of three critical forensic roles with the same medical officer (namely, Dr P. Venkata Ramana Rao) who functioned simultaneously as the autopsy surgeon while conducting postmortem examination, chemical analyst for forensic/DNA examination and a member of the post-incident internal inquiry committee. Each of these roles, by the very nature of their functions, require institutional independence, objectivity, and professional detachment. There appears to be no justification for inclusion of the autopsy surgeon in all these roles, which create a great deal of doubt in the mind of the Court.
21.5. The premature destruction of the deceased's viscera, ordinarily the cornerstone of any postmortem DNA comparison, before completing the court-mandated investigation, has irrevocably compromised the proceedings. Acting on the High Court's order dated 14th February, 2024, in W.P. No. 29622 of 2023, the (then) ACP (East)/IO, Visakhapatnam, wrote to RFSL, Visakhapatnam, on 24th February, 2024, to confirm whether the viscera he had sent on 16th August, 2023, remained preserved after chemical analysis. RFSL, Visakhapatnam acknowledged the
- 45 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR receipt of the viscera and assured to issue a written reply on 26th February, 2024. Anticipating that response, the ACP (East)/IO collected the appellant's blood sample on 25th February, 2024, at King George Hospital, sealed it in a thermocol box and documented the process with photographs and video. However, RFSL, Visakhapatnam, vide letter dated 26th February, 2024, informed the ACP that it had destroyed the viscera "after analysis," citing the IO's note in the Letter of Advice that preservation was "not necessary." By failing to ensure the preservation of this critical forensic material before securing the DNA match ordered by the High Court, the ACP and RFSL have undermined the investigation's integrity and foreclosed any possibility of conclusively establishing the cause of death.
21.6. In the autopsy report dated 17th July, 2023, under Column D (Abdomen), it has been explicitly recorded that approximately 80 grams of semi-digested rice like brown, yellow, and white coloured food particles were present in the stomach contents of the deceased, along with a "suspicious smell." This observation assumes critical importance when juxtaposed with the fact that Ms. X was allegedly placed on a ventilator
- 46 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR from the early hours of 15th July, 2023, and remained in an unconscious/vegetative state until her demise on 16th July, 2023. The presence of semi-digested food in the stomach, as noted in the autopsy report, is irreconcilable with the claim that the deceased was on continuous ventilatory support from the early hours of 15th July, 2023. Under normal conditions, solid foods get digested and move from the stomach to the intestine within approximately 2½ to 6 hours, with carbohydrate-rich meals leaving even sooner; liquids pass almost immediately. In a state of shock or coma, gastric motility is markedly impaired, often delaying emptying of the stomach far beyond the normal window, but cannot leave a "suspicious smell" and undigested rice nearly 48 hours later.21 There is no accepted protocol for feeding solid rice to a patient on mechanical ventilation. This stark mismatch between Ms. X's autopsy/viscera's report and the hospital's narrative strongly suggests that either the ventilator timeline was misrepresented or additional, and yet undisclosed, events occurred after the last proper meal taken by Ms. X. 21.7. In particular, two documents of foundational evidentiary value, the Chemical Analysis Report of the viscera and the final
- 47 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR opinion on the cause of death, have not been placed on record. These documents are not ancillary but form the core forensic backbone of any investigation into unnatural death. The Chemical Analysis Report, for instance, could conclusively determine whether the deceased was administered poison, sedatives, or any narcotic agent that may have contributed to her fall from the terrace or deterioration of her vitals. The final cause of death report is essential for understanding whether death was a result of accidental trauma, deliberate assault, or complications arising from medical intervention. The appellant has made multiple attempts, both personally and through counsel, to obtain copies of these documents. Even the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the Court noted during the site visits and interactions that these records were not handed over, either to the Commissioner herself or to the appellant's representatives. The resistance exhibited by the respondents in providing such critical information cannot be viewed as a mere administrative lapse and creates a grave doubt on the bona fides of their actions.
21.8. Furthermore, the assessment conducted by the Medical Board constituted at the All-India
- 48 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, a premier and impartial medical authority, lends significant weight to the appellant's contentions. The Board, after a detailed examination of the submitted medical records and documents, found that the deceased was admitted to Venkataramana Hospital in a conscious and irritable state, with a Glasgow Coma Scale E3V2M5-Score of 10/15. The Glasgow score, which is scored between 3 and 15 (Score 3 being the worst, and Score 15 being the best) is internationally recognised as an indicator of a patient's neurological activity. A score in this range suggests that the patient was neurologically active and semi-alert, and not comatose at the time of hospital admission.22 The deceased had sustained multiple severe grade injuries, including traumatic brain injury, pneumothorax, skull fractures, and fractures of the spine, pelvis, and limbs. These findings confirm that the deceased was critically injured but was not beyond the scope of meaningful medical intervention. Importantly, the AIIMS Medical Board observed that the patient's condition deteriorated over time, ultimately dropping to a Glasgow Coma Scale E1VTM1-Score of 3/15, suggesting that a medical or neurological failure occurred during hospitalisation. The Board
- 49 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR explicitly stated that while it could not opine definitively on medical negligence owing to lack of access to the treating doctors and hospital infrastructure, its observations were strictly based on objective documentation.
22. The foregoing facts and circumstances, including the glaring inconsistencies in the medical records, the autopsy report indicating suspicious contents of stomach despite the deceased allegedly being on ventilatory support, the unexplained lapses in seizure and preservation of critical forensic evidence, and the contradictory statements by authorities, collectively highlight a case of exceptional complexity and concern. These elements are not indicative of mere procedural irregularities but point towards a potentially deeper malaise in the investigational process. In such a situation, it becomes imperative to ensure that the sanctity of the administration of justice is preserved, and public confidence is upheld. Criminal investigation must, in all circumstances, be both fair and effective to uphold the rule of law. It is in these rare and extraordinary circumstances that the intervention of this Court is warranted, and the transfer of the investigation to the CBI becomes not only justified but essential."
- 50 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR
9. Following the ratio rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above cases, in order to conduct a fair inquiry/investigation to ascertain the reason for death of the husband of the complainant, the petitioner (brother of the deceased) be directed to file a complaint to the Director General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department, Bangalore, forthwith and the said agency is requested to conduct a detailed enquiry by appointing an officer of the rank not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police, CID, Crime Wing and take decision in the matter in accordance with law. It is also to be noted that the Director General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department, Bangalore be directed to complete the entire enquiry within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and to file the report before this Court in compliance of the same. In that view of the matter, the acceptance of 'B' report by the court of 41st Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore in Crime No.12 of 2023 is hereby
- 51 -
NC: 2025:KHC:44330 WP No. 11551 of 2023 HC-KAR set aside, as the same is not permissible under law. It is also to be noted that, Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the Registrar, CJM, Nrurpatunga Road, Bangalore, and to the office of the Director General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department, Carlton House, Bengaluru to take further action in the matter.
SD/-
(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40