Case Note & Summary
The matter arose from a writ petition filed in the High Court by Sri Kaptan Singh, who later died and was represented by his legal representatives, seeking transfer of his complaint dated April 23, 1991 for investigation by an independent police agency. The dispute concerned alleged illegal alienation of his properties while he was in police custody. The High Court dismissed the writ petition summarily on November 3, 1992, leading to the appeal by special leave before the Supreme Court. The appellant claimed ownership of properties mentioned in the writ petition. He alleged that while he was kept in police custody in connection with a crime imputed to him, a person holding himself out as his power of attorney alienated his property and inducted third parties into possession. Despite repeated complaints to authorities, the local police allegedly colluded in these activities and took no action. It later appeared that before the complaint to the Commissioner of Police, the local police had investigated and sent a report, which was filed as Annexures 1 and 2 to the counter affidavit of Alok Kumar, DCP, South Delhi. The Court observed that the dispute involved acute disputed questions of fact. Meanwhile, the appellant was murdered, and the trial regarding his murder was pending in the Sessions Court. The core issue was whether the High Court's summary dismissal of the writ petition seeking transfer of investigation should be interfered with, and whether the Supreme Court could adjudicate the underlying factual dispute in the special leave appeal. The appellant contended that the local police colluded in the alienation of his property and failed to act on his complaints, warranting independent investigation. The respondent, through the counter affidavit, indicated that local police had already investigated and filed a report, and the matter involved disputed questions of fact. The Supreme Court heard counsel for both sides. It noted the appellant's death and the pending murder trial, stating it need not go into merits in that behalf. The Court observed that the dispute was one of acute disputed questions of fact, which could not be satisfactorily adjudicated in the appeal. Therefore, it declined to interfere with the High Court's order. The Court dismissed the appeal without costs, leaving the controversy open and relegating the legal representatives of the deceased appellant to have the matter adjudicated in an appropriate forum.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Transfer of Investigation - Writ of Mandamus - Not mentioned - The appellant sought a writ of mandamus to transfer his complaint dated April 23, 1991 for investigation by an independent police agency, alleging police collusion in property alienation while he was in custody. The High Court dismissed the writ petition summarily; the Supreme Court found the dispute involved acute disputed questions of fact and declined to adjudicate, relegating the legal representatives to an appropriate forum. Held that the appeal is dismissed without costs, leaving the controversy open (Para 1).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the writ petition seeking transfer of a criminal complaint to an independent police agency, and whether the Supreme Court should interfere given the appellant's death and pending murder trial
Final Decision
The appeal was dismissed without costs. The Court left open the controversy and relegated the legal representatives of the deceased appellant to have the matter adjudicated in an appropriate forum.
Law Points
- Writ of mandamus for transfer of investigation not granted when dispute involves acute disputed questions of fact
- Supreme Court declined to adjudicate factual disputes in special leave appeal
- legal representatives relegated to appropriate forum
- appeal dismissed without costs
