Cheque Bounce Cases Should Ordinarily Be Sent To Mediation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Calls For Mediation In NI Act Matters 138 NI Act | Belated Plea Of Forged Signatures Cannot Be Used To Delay Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses Handwriting Expert Sections 332 & 333 IPC | Lawful Discharge Of Duty Must Be Proved, Mere Status As Public Servant Not Enough: Allahabad High Court Bus Conductor Accused of Assaulting Traffic Inspectors Custody With Biological Mother Cannot Ordinarily Be Treated As Illegal Detention: Delhi High Court Refuses Habeas Corpus For Return Of Child To Canada Foreign Custody Orders Must Yield To Welfare Of Child: Delhi High Court Refuses To Enforce Canadian Return Order Through Habeas Corpus Possible Criminal Racket Luring Young Girls Through Self-Proclaimed Peers And Tantriks Must Be Examined: J&K High Court Orders Wider Judicial Scrutiny Nomenclature Cannot Determine Constitutional Entitlement: Supreme Court Strikes Down Exclusion Of ‘Academic Arrangement’ Employees From Regularisation Testimony Of Related Witnesses Cannot Be Discarded Merely For Relationship: Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction 149 IPC | Presence In Unlawful Assembly Is Enough For Murder Liability”: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Directly Recruited Engineers Entitled To Seniority From Date Of Initial Appointment Including Training Period: Supreme Court Section 32 Evidence Act | If There Is Even An Iota Of Suspicion, Dying Declaration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Framing A Case On Public Perceptions And Personal Predilections Ends Up In A Mess: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal In Alleged Parricide Arson Case When Oppression Petition Is Pending, Courts Must Ensure The Subject Matter Does Not Disappear Before Adjudication: Supreme Court Orders Status Quo In ₹1000 Crore Redevelopment Dispute Parties Cannot Participate In Arbitration And Later Challenge The Process Only After An Unfavourable Outcome : Supreme Court ICSID Clause Is Only A Fail-Safe Mechanism, Not A Restriction: Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Tribunal’s Constitution In MCGM Dispute Passive Euthanasia | 'Right To Die With Dignity Is An Intrinsic Facet Of Article 21': Supreme Court Permits Withdrawal Of Life Support Medical Board Must Record Reasons Before Denying Disability Pension To Armed Forces Personnel: Kerala High Court Grants Disability Pension To Air Force Corporal 138 NI Act | Directors Cannot Be Prosecuted If Company Is Not Made Accused: Allahabad High Court Quashes Cheque Bounce Cases Broad Daylight Removal of Goods by Known Creditors Is Not Theft: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Shopkeeper’s Insurance Claim Reservation Cannot Freeze Private Land Forever – Lapse Under Section 127 MRTP Act Operates Automatically: Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Transfer On Marriage Cannot Defeat Helper’s First Right To Promotion: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Anganwadi Helper’s Promotion Where Accusations Are Prima Facie True, Statutory Bar Under Section 43D(5) UAPA Operates; Bail Cannot Be Granted: Jharkhand High Court Bomb Hurled At Head Of Victim Shows Clear Intention To Kill: Kerala High Court Upholds Life Sentence In Kannur Political Murder Case Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment

No Evidence to Demonstrate Bias or Lack of Credibility in Police Investigation: Delhi HC Dismisses Plea for Re-investigation in Shahdara Quintuple Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court dismissed a petition seeking re-investigation of a high-profile quintuple murder in Shahdara, Delhi. The case titled ‘Krishna vs. Delhi Police & Ors’ was pronounced by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Sharma on April 4, 2024.

 

The petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., raised questions about the alleged wrongful implication of the petitioner’s family members in a quintuple murder case due to media pressure on the Delhi Police. The petitioner sought transfer of the case to the CBI or an independent agency, citing lapses in the police investigation.

 

Initially, the FIR was lodged against unknown persons under Section 302 of the IPC, but the petitioner’s son and son-in-law were later arrested. The petitioner contested the investigation, highlighting issues such as delay in FIR registration, failure to examine local witnesses, and overlooking the property dispute angle. She also questioned the probability of her family members committing the crime.

The Court observed that no substantial evidence was presented to demonstrate any bias or lack of credibility in the police investigation. It was noted that scientific evidence like DNA profiling implicated the petitioner’s son and son-in-law in the crime. The property dispute angle, explored by the police, was found unsubstantiated.

The Court also made a distinction between an inquiry under Section 174 and an investigation under Section 154 of the Cr.P.C. It ruled that the FIR’s registration and the investigative process were in order as per legal requirements.

Decision The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal for re-investigation, citing no substantial ground to doubt the credibility or impartiality of the police investigation. The Court emphasized that the scientific evidence and investigation findings are pending evaluation by the trial court. The petition and pending applications were accordingly disposed of.

Date of Decision: April 4, 2024

Krishna vs. Delhi Police & Ors

Latest Legal News