“Serious Issue”: Madras High Court Orders Probe After IO Says She Didn't Investigate Case, Her Signatures Were Forged
The Madras High Court recently ordered a de novo investigation into a case after the Investigation Officer informed the court that she had not investigated the case and her signature in the final report was forged.
After the unusual turn of events, Justice Anand Venkatesh directed the CBCID to take over the investigation. The court added that the investigation should not be limited to the issue of the case but also ascertain as to who prepared the earlier police report. Calling it a serious issue, the court added that after the truth comes to light, independent proceedings needed to be initiated.
“The case in hand requires such reinvestigation to be ordered by this Court. Such reinvestigation should not confine itself to the issue involved in the case but also to ascertain as to who prepared the earlier police report and who had forged the signature of the so called investigation officer. This is a serious issue which must also be investigated in the course of reinvestigation. If the truth comes to light, independent proceedings must be initiated in that regard also,” the court observed.
The court was hearing a petition filed by P Venkatesan who had initially filed a complaint against some persons under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) of IPC. Venkatesan had a grievance that the investigation was not being conducted properly. The police had filed its final report and the same was taken cognizance of by the Magistrate. Thus, Venkatesan had approached the court to set aside the final report and transfer the investigation to the CBCID.
The court, to verify the facts of the case, summoned the investigating officer who stated that she had neither investigated the case nor filed the final report before the concerned court. The IO also informed the court that she came to know of the entire facts only upon receiving a summon from the court and that she had deposed the facts before the trial court also.
Noting that the case was quite unprecedented, the court was convinced that the investigation had not taken place and the entire criminal proceedings was fabricated. The court emphasized that de novo investigation could be ordered only in very rare cases, and remarking the present case to be one such, the court deemed it fit to order a de novo investigation and ordered accordingly.
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr.G.Karuppasamy Pandian for Mr.Jenefer Bibin
Counsel for Respondents: Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 452
Case Title: P Venkatesan v The Superintendent of Police and Others
Case No: Crl.O.P.(MD) No.768 of 2023