Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmad

Facts

An investigation was undertaken against Nazir Ahmad in respect of alleged cognizable offences. The High Court interfered with the police investigation and purported to restrain it. The matter reached the Privy Council on the question of the court's power to control an ongoing police investigation.

Issues

• Whether the courts can interfere with or control the statutory power of the police to investigate a cognizable offence.
• Whether registration of an FIR is a condition precedent to commencing investigation.

Arguments

It was urged that the High Court could superintend and check an investigation said to be improper. The contrary position, accepted by the Board, was that investigation of cognizable offences is an executive function statutorily entrusted to the police, into which the judiciary cannot intrude until the investigation culminates in a court proceeding.

Held

The Privy Council held that the functions of the judiciary and the police are complementary but separate, and the courts should not interfere with the statutory right of the police to investigate a cognizable offence so long as the investigation is in progress. The court's functions begin only when a charge is preferred on completion of the investigation. The Board further clarified that the receipt and recording of an FIR is not a condition precedent to the commencement of investigation; the police may act on information received 'or otherwise'.

Ratio decidendi

Investigation of a cognizable offence is the exclusive statutory province of the police; the judiciary cannot interfere with an investigation in progress, and an FIR is not a sine qua non for starting investigation.

Significance

The foundational authority on the separation of police investigative function from judicial control, repeatedly affirmed by the Supreme Court (including in S.N. Sharma v. Bipen Kumar Tiwari and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal). It remains the bedrock principle under the BNSS scheme.

Related