Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.71 seconds)

The State Of Telangana vs Habib Abdullah Jeelani & Ors on 6 January, 2017

8 The High Court was of the view that (i) the truth of the allegations was a matter which had to be ascertained by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation; and (ii) in view of the seriousness of the allegations, no relief was being granted to the second respondent (the first accused). However, the High Court proceeded to issue a blanket restraint against the arrest of the third respondent (the second accused) by directing that the police would complete the investigation and file a final report in accordance with law. We are affirmatively of the view that the direction of the High Court is unsustainable in law. The narration in the earlier part of the judgment would indicate that the registration of the FIR was preceded by a report submitted by the Collector, Khammam to the High Court which had mandated an enquiry into the allegation in regard to the fabrication of a judicial record. It was pursuant to the report filed by the Collector, that the High Court directed the Sub Divisional Magistrate to proceed on the administrative side in accordance with law. An FIR has been registered involving a serious allegation in regard to the fabrication of judicial records. 9 In The State of Telangana vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and Ors.1, a controversy arose before this Court where the High Court while declining to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing an investigation, restrained the investigating agency from arresting the accused persons during investigation. This Court held that that such a direction amounted to an exercise under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure without satisfying any of the conditions stipulated 1 (2017) 2 SCC 779 Crl.A.274-275/2021 6 under that section. This Court held:
Supreme Court of India Cites 46 - Cited by 1683 - D Misra - Full Document
1   2 Next