Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.45 seconds)Section 239 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947
Delhi Administration vs Ram Singh on 3 May, 1961
In Delhi Administration Vs. Ram
5
Singh (AIR 1962 SC 63), the Supreme Court
held that, the expression 'dealing with the
offences' occurring in sub-section (1) of
Section 13 of the Act includes power of
investigation, and that the offences under the
Act can be investigated only by Special Police
Officer and not by other Police Officer. The
Supreme Court said that the Special Police
Officer being competent to investigate, it is
only he and his Assistant Police Officers who
are the only persons competent to investigate
the offences under the Act, and that the Police
Officer not specially appointed as Special Police
Officer cannot investigate the offences under
the Act even though they are cognizable
offences.
Section 4 in The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 7 in The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Mubarak Ali on 3 February, 1959
In the State of Madhya Pradesh Vs.
Mubarak Ali (AIR 1959 SC 707), while
6
dealing with the provisions of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1947, the Supreme Court listed
several steps involved in the investigation of
an offence starting from the receipt of
information and ending with the filing of the
charge-sheet, thereby making it clear that,
even the act of filing of the charge-sheet is a
step in course of investigation.
M. Rajeswari vs State By P.S.I. (L And O), Kengeri Gate ... on 24 July, 2001
6. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
the case of M.Rajeswari Vs. State of P.S.I.
(L and O), Kengeri Gate Police Station,
Bangalore, [2001 (5) Kar. L.J. 532] by
referring to the above decisions of the Apex
Court has held that, the Sub-Inspector of
Police of Kengeri Gate Police Station who is not
a Special Police Officer competent to deal with
the offences under the Act within the meaning
of sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Act,
7
more so, when he is not of the rank of an
Inspector of Police, which would be the
minimum condition in view of sub-section (2)
of Section 13 of the Act. In the case on hand,
the case has been registered and investigation
has been done and charge-sheet has been filed
by a Head Constable of the Kittur Police
Station, who is not a Special Officer who is
competent to deal with the offence under the
Act, within the meaning of sub-section (1) of
Section 13 of the Act, when he is not of the
rank of an Inspector of Police, which could be
the minimum condition in view of sub-section
(2) of Section 13 of the Act. Without
considering this aspect, the learned Magistrate
has rejected the discharge application filed by
the petitioners.
1