NDLI: Abcd Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Investigation: Transfer of investigation to Central Agency
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Order
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Writ Petition
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Petition Disposed Off
Headnote	Investigation: Transfer of investigation to Central Agency – FIR No.58 of 2018 filed by the petitioner against respondent no.7- Police Officer alleging that respondent no.7 took undue advantage of her situation and had forcible intercourse with her – Writ of Mandamus filed by the petitioner seeking directions that the investigation arising out said FIR be transferred from Delhi Police to an independent Central Agency – Held: The investigation into the crime registered pursuant to FIR No.58 of 2018 was conducted by a Special Investigation Team and a charge-sheet has been filed – The apprehension that was expressed at some stage that the mobile phones belonging to Respondent No.7 were not being taken in custody, was dealt with and it was ensured that said mobiles were taken into custody of the investigating agency – The data from those mobiles was also sought to be recovered and Respondent No.7 did extend cooperation in ensuring that the data could be retrieved – However, the assertion on behalf of the petitioner was that complete data was not retrieved – Both the mobile phones were also sent for forensic analysis – It was suggested by the petitioner that certain pictures may have been taken by Respondent No.7, which data is not presently available – However, extracts from iCloud was fully available with the investigating agency – The contention that the mobile phone of the Investigating Officer was damaged may not be material as details of any conversation between the petitioner and the Investigating Officer, may also be proved through the mobile phone of the petitioner herself – There was thus, nothing substantial which could either show that the investigation was not well directed or had failed to look into a particular direction – Therefore, nothing further is required to be done – Petitioner is directed that if any video or audio recordings are still being retained by her, same may be handed over to the Special Investigation Team – It is left to the Special Investigation Team to consider whether that part needs to be dealt with in the supplementary charge-sheet which, is contemplated to be filedInvestigation: Transfer of investigation to Central Agency – FIR filed by the mother of Respondent no.7 that the petitioner and her family members had been pressurising the family of respondent no.7 to pay a sum of Rs.15 lakhs failing which they were threatened with filing of cases with allegations of rape and other criminal cases against respondent no.7 – Writ of Mandamus filed by the petitioner seeking directions that the investigation arising out the FIR filed by the mother of respondent no.7 be transferred to an independent Central Agency; that the Investigating Agency to immediately collect Call Detail Records of the mobile numbers and confiscate the two mobile phones of the accused and to retrieve the CCTV footage of the hotel where the accused took her to commit the offence of rape; that protection to the petitioner and her family members be given – Held: As regards the crime registered pursuant to FIR lodged by the mother of Respondent No.7, protection was afforded to the petitioner and her family members and the application under s.438 of the Code was also dealt with – An application filed by the petitioner under s.482 of the Code is also pending with the High Court – Thus, petitioner invoked the processes of the court and was afforded adequate protection – No reason to transfer the investigation to any other agency.Contempt of court: In FIR No. 314, as well as in the application preferred thereafter, insinuation was made by petitioner that Respondent No.7 had arranged attack on her and was responsible for the incident wherein she was hit by a car – However, CCTV footage showed that she was not hit by a car but by a thela (rickshaw) which prima facie meant that the allegations in her sworn statement before the Court were not truthful – Making a false statement on oath is an offence punishable under s.181 of the IPC while furnishing false information with intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person is punishable under s.182 of the IPC – These offences by virtue of s.195(1)(a)(i) of the Code can be taken cognizance of by any court only upon a proper complaint in writing as stated in said Section – In the circumstances, a notice is required to be issued to the petitioner in suo motu exercise of power of this Court “why action in contempt be not initiated against her and why appropriate direction be not passed under s.195(1)(a)(i) of the Code” – Registry directed to register the matter as suo motu proceedings – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.181, 182 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.195(1)(a)(i).
Judge	N/A
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 1347
Petitioner	Abcd
Respondent	Union Of India & Ors.
SCR	[2019] 15 S.C.R. 1
Judgement Date	2019-12-10
Case Number	191

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Abcd Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Bimal Gurung Vs. Union of India and Ors.

M.c. Mehta Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Sabeeha Faikage & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Indira Sawhney Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Vineet Kumar Mathur Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Arnab Ranjan Goswami Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors.

M.c. Mehta Vs. Union of India and Ors.

M.c. Mehta Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Abcd Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Abcd Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Bimal Gurung Vs. Union of India and Ors.

M.c. Mehta Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Sabeeha Faikage & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Indira Sawhney Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Vineet Kumar Mathur Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Arnab Ranjan Goswami Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors.

M.c. Mehta Vs. Union of India and Ors.

M.c. Mehta Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Abcd Vs. Union of India & Ors.