Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Right to Be Considered for Promotion, Not a Right to Promotion: Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Retrospective Promotion    |     Inherent Power of Courts Can Recall Admission of Insufficiently Stamped Documents: Supreme Court    |     Courts Cannot Substitute Their Opinion for Security Agencies in Threat Perception Assessments: J&K High Court Directs Reassessment of Political Leader's Threat Perception    |     Service Law | Violation of Natural Justice: Discharge Without Notice or Reason: Gauhati High Court Orders Reinstatement and Regularization of Circle Organizers    |     Jharkhand High Court Quashes Family Court Order, Reaffirms Jurisdiction Based on Minor’s Ordinary Residence in Delhi    |     Ex-Serviceman Status Ceases After First Employment in Government Job: Calcutta High Court Upholds SBI’s Cancellation of Ex-Serviceman's Appointment Over False Declaration of Employment    |     Maxim Res Ipsa Loquitur Applies When State Instrumentalities Are Directly Responsible: Delhi High Court Orders MCD to Pay ₹10 Lakhs Compensation for Death    |     Wilful Avoidance of Service Must Be Established Before Passing Ex Parte Order Under Section 126(2) CrPC: Patna High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Maintenance Order    |     MP High Court Imposes Rs. 10,000 Costs for Prolonging Litigation, Upholds Eviction of Petitioners from Father's Property    |     When Detention Unnecessary Despite Serious Allegations of Fraud Bail Should be Granted: Kerala HC    |     Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Relocation Alone Cannot Justify Transfer: Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Move Case from Nellore to Delhi, Orders Fresh Probe    |     Punjab & Haryana HC Double Bench Upholds Protection for Married Partners in Live-In Relationships, Denies Same for Minors    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     Smell of Alcohol in Post-Mortem Insufficient to Establish Intoxication: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Liability of Insurance Company in Motor Accident Case    |     No Grounds for Transfer: Free Bus Fare for Women in Telangana Reduces Travel Burden: Telangana High Court Rejects Wife's Petition to Transfer Divorce Case    |     Mechanical Referrals Invalid: "Deputy Registrar Must Apply Judicial Mind: Allahabad HC Quashes Deputy Registrar's Order in Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Election Dispute    |    

In a Gang Rape Case Delhi High Court Denies Transfer of Case to CBI

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment delivered by the High Court of Delhi, Justice Amit Bansal dismissed a petition seeking the transfer of an investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The case, involving allegations of assault, gang rape, and the death of the petitioner's mother, has been a subject of legal scrutiny for its complexities and the sensitivity of the allegations.

Justice Bansal, in his judgment delivered on January 4, 2024, meticulously addressed the petition filed by Manish Chadha, a qualified lawyer appearing in person. Chadha sought a transfer of the investigation of FIR No.440/2020, under Sections 308/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), to the CBI or any other quasi-judicial body.

The Court, after thorough consideration of the facts and arguments presented, concurred with the findings and directions of the trial court. Justice Bansal stated, “The trial court's comprehensive review of the investigation, including allegations of gang rape, cause of death, and theft, led to additional directions for further investigation and filing of a supplementary chargesheet.” He further emphasized that "an overall analysis of the aforesaid order passed by the Trial Court would show that wherever the Trial Court was not satisfied with the investigation carried out, it has directed further investigation or sought an explanation from the investigating agency.”

In his analysis, Justice Bansal referred to various Supreme Court precedents, underlining the principle that directing investigations to the CBI is an extraordinary power, to be exercised sparingly and in exceptional situations. He cited notable cases such as State of West Bengal And Ors. v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and Ors. and Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh And Ors., to reinforce this legal standpoint.

The judgment also acknowledged the role of the Amicus Curiae, Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Senior Advocate, whose expertise in criminal law was pivotal in assisting the Court.

High Court found no merit in the petitioner’s allegations of police collusion with the accused persons or inadequacy in the investigation. As a result, the petition for the transfer of the investigation was dismissed, supporting the trial court’s capability to handle the complexities of the case with due diligence.

Date of Decision: January 4, 2024

MANISH CHADHA VS STATE GOVT OF NCT AND ORS

 

Similar News