468 - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Rules: Delayed Investigations Violate Fundamental Rights

9Feb

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules: Delayed Investigations Violate Fundamental Rights

In this appeal, the Supreme Court allowed the petition and quashed the criminal proceedings against the appellant. The Court held that the prosecution sanction under Section 197 CrPC was a non-speaking order devoid of application of mind and was therefore invalid. Furthermore, the inordinate delay of over 11 years in completing the investigation violated the appellant's fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. Facts Of The Case: The case originates from the alleged irregular issuance of arms licenses in 2004-2005 when the appellant, an IAS officer, served as the District Magistrate-cum-Licensing Authority in Saharsa, Bihar. An FIR was registered in 2005 alleging that licenses were granted to unfit, non-resident, and even fictitious persons without p...

Supreme Court Revives Forgery Case: Fake Stamp Paper Probe Must Go On

The Supreme Court held that a Magistrate's referral under Section 156(3) CrPC for police investigation is justified when a complaint discloses a cognizable offence and such a direction is conducive to justice. The High Court's orders quashing the referral were set aside, emphasizing that the police must be allowed to investigate prima facie allegations of forgery and fabrication of documents. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Sadiq B. Hanchinmani, filed a civil suit claiming ownership of a property via an oral gift from his father, challenging a registered sale deed in favour of accused No. 1, Veena. The suit was dismissed in 2013. During the pendency of his appeal (RFA No. 4095/2013) before the High Court, a status quo order on the property's title and possession was initially granted b...

Supreme Court Reduced 6-Month Sentence in Forgery Contempt Case: Landmark SC Judgment

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellants under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for fabricating and submitting fake High Court orders to obstruct court proceedings. Rejecting the plea of limitation under Section 20, the Court ruled that contempt proceedings were validly initiated within one year. However, it reduced the sentence from six months to one month, emphasizing that forgery of judicial records undermines the administration of justice. The Court clarified that strict proof is required in contempt cases but found the charges proven beyond doubt. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a property dispute where the District Munsiff Court, Tiruchengode, passed a decree in 2004 in favor of J.K.K. Rangammal Charitable Trust, ordering the eviction of the contemno...