9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Section 482 of the Code was filed by the respondents for transfer of the investigation which had been initiated for an offence under Sections 177, 186 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code to the CBI. In the year 1998, the said criminal petition was disposed of by the High Court refusing to transfer the investigation to CBI. By the said order the High Court, while disposing of the said criminal petition, held that it was not necessary to hand over the investigation to CBI in the facts and circumstances of the case and the SBCID was directed to continue with the investigation. After more than 3 ½ years of the final order refusing to transfer the investigation to CBI, an Interlocutory Application was filed in the disposed of criminal petition by the complainant/respondents but this time, the learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court transferred the investigation to the CBI and directed the State Police to hand over the records to CBI forthwith. It is this order, by which the investigation was transferred to CBI, is in appeal before us, which, on grant of leave, was heard in the presence of learned counsel for the parties. 4. In our view, the High Court fell in err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent appeared to be an afterthought and totally false. On 8th of October, 1998, the aforesaid report was forwarded to the State Human Rights Commission, Tamil Nadu. The Commission accepted the report and informed the respondent that the Commission was satisfied that no further enquiry should be conducted at the level of the Commission. The Commission did not proceed with the matter and following the view taken by them, a departmental enquiry that was initiated, was also dropped. 7. In October 1998, the respondent filed the aforesaid criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code in the Madras High Court seeking the following reliefs : (a) Direction to immediately register an FIR based on the complaint filed on 2nd of September, 1998; (b) Transfer further investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation; (c) Order payment of compensation of Rs. One lakh. 8. As noted herein earlier, by a final order dated 1st of March, 2001, a learned Single Judge of the High Court disposed of the said criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code refusing to transfer the investigation to CBI and also direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plication in the aforesaid disposed of petition saying that on the date of the aforesaid final order of the High Court dated 1st of March, 2001, there was no post of DSP (SB CID) Nagapattinam, as the said post was abolished by a Government order dated 17th of May, 2000. It was also brought to the notice by the DSP (SB CID) Nagapattinam that in Rule 57 of the Manual for Instructions for State Special Branch, the Special Branch Officers were not empowered to conduct investigation of cases. Accordingly, an application was filed by him in the disposed of criminal petition for modification of the final order dated 1st of March, 2001 and for a direction to the DSP (CB CID) Nagapattinam instead of DSP (SB CID) Nagapattinam for investigation. This application filed by DSP (SBCID) was registered as Crl. M.P. 3713/2001. 10. During the pendency of this application filed by the DSP [SB CID], an application was filed by the respondent complaining that he and the witnesses were ill treated and harassed by the Investigating Officer and the investigation was not conducted in an unbiased manner and accordingly, investigation must be transferred to CBI as prayed for by him earlier. 11. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt, the said court in the absence of statutory provision becomes functus officio and is disentitled to entertain a fresh prayer for the same relief unless the former order is set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction in a manner prescribed by law. The court becomes functus officio the moment the official order disposing of a case is signed. Such an order cannot be altered except to the extent of correcting a clerical or an arithmetical error." 16. Yet, in the case of Simrikha v. Dolley Mukherjee and Chhabi Mukherjee & Anr., (1990) 2 SCC 437, this court held : "The inherent power under Section 482 is intended to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court and to secure ends of justice. Such power cannot be exercised to do something, which is expressly barred under the Code. If any consideration of the facts by way of review is not permissible under the Code and is expressly barred, it is not for the Court to exercise its inherent power to reconsider the matter and record a conflicting decision. If there had been change in the circumstances of the case, it would be in order for the High Court to exercise its inherent powers in the prevailing circumstances and pass appr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... metical errors. Such being the position and in view of the expressed prohibition in the Code itself in the form of Section 362, exercise of power under Section 482 of the Code cannot be exercised to reopen or alter an order disposing of a petition decided on merits. 22. In the present case, we find that the High Court, in the original final order, disposing of the petition under Section 482 of the Code has specifically given reasons for rejecting the prayer for handing over the investigation to the CBI authorities. 23. That apart, after the final order was passed rejecting the prayer of the respondent to hand over the investigation to the CBI authonties, by which, the criminal petition filed under Section 482 was practically rejected, it was not open to the High Court to pass a fresh order in the disposed of petition or even in the pending petition of the DSP (SB CID) Nagapattinam, directing investigation to be made by the CBI authorities. 24. As noted herein earlier, Section 362 of the Code prohibits a Court from making alternation in a judgment after the final order or Judgment was signed by the Court disposing of the case finally except to correct clerical or a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
