NDLI: Charansingh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Code of Criminal Procedure 1973: Preliminary enquiry
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Preliminary enquiry – Corruption case – A complaint was received against the appellant in the office of the Director General, Anti-corruption Bureau, Maharashtra State, Mumbai on 7.2.2018, wherein various allegations were made against the appellant and his brothers with regard to accumulating the assets disproportionate to his known sources of income – At that time the appellant was a Member and President of Municipal Council – In connection with the said complaint, Police Inspector, Anti-corruption Bureau had issued notice dated 04.03.2020 to the appellant asking him to provide documents relating to his property, assets, bank statements, income tax returns and to give statement to the police – Feeling aggrieved with the said notice calling upon the appellant to personally remain present before the investigating officer of the Anti-corruption Bureau, Nagpur to give his statement in an ‘open enquiry’ in respect of the property owned by him along with the information on the points stated in the said notice, the appellant preferred writ petition before the High Court – High Court dismissed the writ petition – In the instant appeal, question which arose for the consideration was whether such an enquiry at pre-FIR stage would be legal – Held: An enquiry at pre-FIR stage is held to be permissible and not only permissible but desirable, more particularly in cases where the allegations are of misconduct of corrupt practice acquiring the assets/properties disproportionate to his known sources of income – After the enquiry/enquiry at pre-registration of FIR stage/ preliminary enquiry, if, on the basis of the material collected during such enquiry, it is found that the complaint is vexatious and/or there is no substance at all in the complaint, the FIR shall not be lodged – However, if the material discloses prima facie a commission of the offence alleged, the FIR will be lodged and the criminal proceedings will be put in motion and further investigation will be carried out in terms of the Code of Criminal Procedure – Therefore, such a preliminary enquiry would be permissible only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not and only thereafter FIR would be registered. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Preliminary enquiry – Extent of, permissibility – By the impugned notice, during the course of the ‘open enquiry’, the appellant was called upon to give his statement and to carry along with the information on the points, which are referred for the purpose of recording his statement – The information sought on the said points had direct connection with the allegations made against the appellant, namely, accumulating assets disproportionate to his known sources of income – However, such a notice, while conducting the ‘open enquiry’, shall be restricted to facilitate the appellant to clarify regarding his assets and known sources of income – The same cannot be said to be a fishing or roving enquiry. Such a statement cannot be said to be a statement under s.160 and/or the statement to be recorded during the course of investigation as per the Code of Criminal Procedure – Such a statement even cannot be used against the appellant during the course of trial – Statement of the appellant and the information so received during the course of discrete enquiry shall be only for the purpose to satisfy and find out whether an offence under s.13(1)(e) of the PC Act, 1988 is disclosed – Such a statement cannot be said to be confessional in character, and as and when and/or if such a statement is considered to be confessional, in that case only, it can be said to be a statement which is self-incriminatory, which can be said to be impermissible in law – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – s.13(1)(e).
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.R. Shah
Neutral Citation	2021 INSC 207
Petitioner	Charansingh
Respondent	State Of Maharashtra And Others
SCR	[2021] 3 S.C.R. 704
Judgement Date	2021-03-24
Case Number	363

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

Charansingh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Sharad Hiru Kolambe Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Shankar @ Gaurl Shankar and Others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Shrishail Nageshi Pare Vs. State of Maharashtra

Raghunath Anant Govilkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mahesh S/o.janardhan Gonnade Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ganesh K. Gulve Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra.

Maruti Nivrutti Navale Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

Ganga Dhar Kalita Vs. The State of Assam and Others

Charansingh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Charansingh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Sharad Hiru Kolambe Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Shankar @ Gaurl Shankar and Others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Shrishail Nageshi Pare Vs. State of Maharashtra

Raghunath Anant Govilkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mahesh S/o.janardhan Gonnade Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ganesh K. Gulve Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra.

Maruti Nivrutti Navale Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

Ganga Dhar Kalita Vs. The State of Assam and Others

Charansingh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others