Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2017 (3) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1803 - SUPREME COURTValidity of Rule 7 of the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SCST Rules) - the rule which was issued by the Central Government, in exercise of the power vested with it, Under Section 23 of the SCST Act - HELD THAT:- In the exercise of its Rule making authority, the Central Government was fully competent and justified, in requiring that the investigative process be conducted by an officer not below the rank of a Deputy Superintendent of Police. The Central Government had the jurisdiction of framing rules, and the Central Government had exercised its jurisdiction within the framework of the authority vested in it. We therefore hereby affirm the validity of Rule 7 of the SCST Rules. Whether the notification issued by the State of Bihar dated 03.06.2002, in exercise of the power vested in the State Government, Under Section 9 of the SCST Act, can be considered to have been exercised in breach of, or in excess of the power delegated to the State Government? - HELD THAT:- The non obstante clause, extended to the State Government, power to overlook and provide differently, from the position contemplated under the SCST Act, as well as the SCST Rules. The issue whether the State Government was competent to relax the above rule, requiring that investigation be not carried out, by an officer below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, and thereby, extend the power of investigation to officers below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, has therefore to be answered in the affirmative - not only Rule 7 of the SCST Rules, but also the notification dated 03.06.2002, issued by the State Government, in exercise of the power vested in it Under Section 9(1)(b) of the SCST Act. The legal position as has been declared by this Court, is in complete consonance and conformity with the postulation contained in Section 465 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This being the position, we have no hesitation in holding, that the second determination rendered by the High Court, to the extent that the investigation carried out by a police officer below the rank of a Deputy Superintendent of Police, after 31.03.1995 and prior to the issuance of the notification dated 03.06.2002 (on 09.08.2008), would stand vitiated, has necessarily to be set aside. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of State of Bihar.
|