Judgment dated 6th September 2024
Cause title : MANDAKINI DIWAN AND ANR vs THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS
Case No: SLP(CRL.) NO.12649 OF 2023
A Bench of Supreme Court Judges Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath and Hon'ble Mr. Prasanna Balachandra Varale directed Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to carry out complete and fair investigation and proceed in accordance to law into the incident and that too expeditiously considering the fact that the incident is of 2016 and submit a report to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Court further directed that if the CBI finds that an FIR needs to be registered, it may itself do so and proceed accordingly and bring such complaint to a logical conclusion. However, if the CBI comes to the conclusion that there is no material which it could collect which is not sufficient in ordinary course to submit a charge sheet, it would close the proceedings. The State of Chhattisgarh is directed to extend all cooperation to the CBI in conducting the investigation and provide all necessary papers and other strategic support to the CBI as may be required.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that:
"14. It is true that power to direct CBI to conduct investigation
is to be exercised sparingly and such orders should not be passed in
routine manner. In the present case, the aggrieved party has raised
allegations of bias and undue influence on the police machinery of
the State of Chhattisgarh. Coupled with the fact that the thorough,
fair and independent investigation needs to be carried out to find
out the truth about the whole incident and in particular about the
ante mortem injuries. We are of the view that such a direction needs
to be issued in the present case.
15. We accordingly allow this appeal, set aside the impugned order
passed by the High Court and further direct the CBI-respondent no.8
to carry out complete and fair investigation and proceed in
accordance to law into the incident and that too expeditiously
considering the fact that the incident is of 2016 and submit a
report to this Court. If the CBI finds that an FIR needs to be
registered, it may itself do so and proceed accordingly and bring
such complaint to a logical conclusion. However, if the CBI comes to
the conclusion that there is no material which it could collect
which is not sufficient in ordinary course to submit a chargesheet,
it would close the proceedings. The State of Chhattisgarh is
directed to extend all cooperation to the CBI in conducting the
investigation and provide all necessary papers and other strategic
support to the CBI as may be required.
16. We make it clear that we have not made any observation on merit.
However, still we clarify that any observation made in this judgment
will not influence the investigation by the CBI. The appeal is
accordingly allowed."
Facts of the case are:
The respondent no.7 was selected and appointed in June 2013 as
Addl.District Judge, Geedam at Dantewada. Respondent no.7 got
married to the deceased on 15.02.2014. However, they had known each
other since 2010. The deceased was working as Asstt. District
Prosecution Officer. At the relevant time they were posted at
Dantewada.
On 12.05.2016, in the evening at about 10:30 PM the appellants who
are mother and the brother of he deceased received a phone call that
Ms. Ranjana Diwan had committed suicide. Immediately they rushed
from Bilaspur to Dantewada and tried to figure out as to what had
happened. According to the appellants they were not provided with
the post mortem report.
It is the case of the appellants that there was something fishy in
the death of Ms. Ranjana Diwan and it was not a case of simple
suicide. It was also their apprehension that respondent no.7 having
sufficient influence being a senior judicial officer had managed the
post mortem in which the cause of death was shown to be suicide by
hanging.
The post-mortem report further indicated that the deceased had six
ante-mortem injuries on her body. The information of suicide was
given to the Dantewada Police Station, a Merg was registered under
section 174 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731. On 13.05.2016, the
police made recoveries, the copy of which is filed as Annexure -P/2.
The post mortem was conducted on 13.05.2016 at 06:30 PM. The cause
of death was reported to be asphyxia due to hanging. Further, six
ante mortem injuries were reported.
According to the appellants, the Police filed the closure report
treating it to be a case of suicide. The appellants repeatedly
continued to represent to the authorities for a fair investigation
after registering First Information Report. All the complaints made
by the appellants to the authorities did not result in the
registering of FIR against respondent no.7. All the complaints
though were inquired into but were ultimately closed as a result of
the influence exerted by the respondent no.7. Till date, neither FIR
has been registered on the several complaints made by the appellants
nor a fair investigation has been carried out in order to find out
the truth. Left with no alternative, the appellants filed writ
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India registered
as W.P. Crl. No.197 of 2016 which was dismissed by the Hon'ble High
Court with liberty to the petitioners therein to avail the
appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum.
Download order dated 6th September 2024 in MANDAKINI DIWAN AND ANR vs THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS, SLP(CRL.) NO.12649 OF 2023