High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/29318/2025dismissed

Harbhajan Kaur And ANR v. State Of Punjab And Others

2025-08-05Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar9 pages

!"#$!%&'&"()

* *

+,-.(/0+($(" -!+ ***! & &"(!+'

1!+'0'

2 !"#0(.,($" -!+'

***!'3"($!( '

) 45*2 2

through video conferencing

6* 5

"#$

% & ' (

(

#)#* +%'

, -erstwhile Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'). (

/ 0

' #44 )5 #)#6

)* ** 4 *" #

% & '&&

#)#* +%'

, Section 331(6) of BNS was deleted and Sections 331(8) & 61 of BNS were added later on wrongly mentioned as BNSS /

8 9 !& :/ %

2 &

# ; /

inter alia,

/ ! %/

' !

' #

/& <

//&

supra

< // ! 9

0 0/

/& >

2 ? )$ #)#6

& / )5 #)#6

0 0/

' #

(

0 0/

( @ /

' # /

(

8 (

0 0/

* ; /

' #

)5 #)#6 )4 ))

+ ,

< & /

(

/ /

// 1D 3/ 9 ) #)#6

)5 #)#6 )4 ))

8 !

/ & E 0#

#)#6 3 ' ## #)#6

/ & E 0* 5 #)#6 3 ' *F 5 #)#6 %/

' !

' #

& & 2

/ !

#$ ) #)#"

E 06 1/

' # !

#F # #)#6 E 0" /

G &

(

/ 2 9

// 8/

8 9 E 04 0F 0$

G & E 0 ) B

' #

< E 05

G & E 0 ) 1 !

' # /&

/ E 0 & 2 A/

/ =/ 3 =/

! !

/ // ! ( 1

// &

// 2

' #

)5 #)#6 )4 ))

(

supra

& :/ %

2 &

/ /

!/ "

: / : :/ %

/& / !& /

/& ipse dixit

2 Mithilesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2015(1) RCR (Criminal) 437 9H!/

: //

! /

//& !

!!&

& 8 :0 %

Satish Kumar Saini and another Vs. State of Punjab and others, 2025(1) RCR (Criminal) 436

Talima Vs. State of Haryana and Ors., 2024(3) RCR (Criminal) 128

& :/ %

/& ! //

/ 1 // :0 %

Harinderpal Singh Bassi Vs. State of Punjab and others, CRM-M-60024 of 2022, )6 ) #)#6, ( = ( A

:/ %

2 "16. Keeping in mind the precedents as laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court, following principles emerge:

The power to transfer an investigation is extraordinary and must be used "sparingly", cautiously and only "in exceptional circumstances".

No one can insist that an offence be investigated by a particular agency. An aggrieved person can only claim that the alleged offence be investigated properly, but he has no right to claim that it be investigated by any particular agency of his choice.

Transfer of investigation is not to be directed by the Court just for the asking nor the same is transferred only to satisfy the ego or vindicate the prestige of a party interested in such investigation, but the decision whether

8 transfer should or should not be ordered, rests on the Court's satisfaction depending upon facts and circumstances of a given case.

The power to order fresh, de novo or re5investigation is vested with the Constitutional Courts; and the commencement of a trial and examination of some witnesses cannot be an absolute impediment for exercising the said constitutional power, which is meant to ensure fair and just investigation.

Though satisfaction of want of proper, fair, impartial and effective investigation eroding its credence and reliability is the precondition for a direction for further investigation or reinvestigation, submission of the charge sheet ipso facto or the pendency of the trial can, by no means, be a prohibitive impediment.

Following exceptional situations may be considered while ordering transfer of investigation:

where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in the public mind, in the investigations, or where the incident may have national and international ramifications, or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights, or when the Court feels that the investigation by the police authorities is not in a proper direction, or when high police officials are involved in the alleged crime, or where investigation by the State police lacks credibility and it is necessary for having "a fair, honest and complete investigation", and particularly, when it is imperative to retain public confidence in the impartial working of the State agencies. ..."

when there is a reasonable apprehension about justice becoming a victim because of shabby or partisan investigation."

3/ /

State of West Bengal and others Vs. The Committee For Protection of

9 Democratic Rights West Bengal and others, (2010) 3 SCC 571, Abhishek Chetal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others, 2019(2) RCR (Criminal) 177, Sudipta Lenka Vs. State of Odisha and another, (2014) 11 SCC 527 Union Territory of Chandigarh Vs. Mohit Dhawan,

SLP (Criminal) No.3405 of 2023, )4 )$ #)#6 3/& = %

9,!/

Vinay Aggarwal Vs. The State of Haryana and others, (2025) 5 SCC 149 ( =

// "7. We are only on the issue of handing over the investigation to the CBI. In State of W.B. v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, (2010) 3 SCC 571, a Five5Judge Bench of this Court held that Constitutional Courts are fully empowered to direct for CBI investigation, and restrictions under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 do not apply to Constitutional Courts. However, this Court had also observed that CBI investigation should not be directed in a routine manner or just because some allegations have been made against the local police. Courts should direct for CBI investigation only in exceptional cases. This is what was said by this Court :

"70.....Insofar as the question of issuing a direction to CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil

confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations."

xxx xxx xxx 9.

The High Courts should direct for CBI investigation only in cases where material prima facie discloses something calling for an investigation by CBI and it should not be done in a routine manner or on the basis of some vague allegations. The "ifs" and "buts" without any definite conclusion are not sufficient to put an agency like CBI into motion [See: Minor Irrigation & Rural Engg. Services, U.P. v. Sahngoo Ram Arya, (2002) 5 SCC 521]. After going through the records of the case, we are of the view that the present case is not the one where CBI investigation ought to have been directed by the High Court ." (emphasis added) $

/ /

& !

' ! ! // E

!& :

) //

& //

;

)" )$ #)#"

vishnu I ( J >J' I !/

>J'