Parallel enquiry under Section 36 of CrPC is not maintainable during the pendency of investigation- Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the parallel enquiry under s.36 of CrPC is not maintainable during the pendency of investigation. This was seen in the case of MAHENDRA KUMAR VAIDYA VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS [WRIT PETITION NO. 23876 OF 2022], which was presided over by Justice G.S. Ahluwalia.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The Petitioner was accused of offences punishable under Sections 376, 450 IPC. While the investigation was pending, the officer concerned, under the directions of the Superintendent of Police submitted a report, concluding that the FIR lodged by the Complainant/Prosecutrix was false. Accordingly, the Petitioner moved the Court, praying that considering the aforesaid report, the Investigating Officer be directed to file the closure report.
The petition is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the State. It is submitted that it is well established principle of law that the parallel enquiry even under Section 36 of CrPC is not maintainable.
The reference of the case of Deepak @ Preetam Verma and another vs. State of M.P. and another by order dated 11/9/2018 passed in M.Cr.C. No.12592/2018 was made in which it was held that parallel enquiry under Section 36 of CrPC during the pendency of investigation is not maintainable.
JUDEGMENT OF THE CASE
The court held that the parallel enquiry under Section 36 of CrPC is not maintainable during the pendency of investigation.
Further, the court held directed the Investigating Officer not to include the report in the police case diary and if it has already been taken on record, then it shall not be considered at all for any purpose and shall not be made a part of the final report.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY VYSHNAVI KRISHNAN.