Hon’ble Supreme Court has dismissed a petition filed
with prayer to constitute a Committee to make further investigation of all the bomb
blasts cases which have taken place since 2002.
In the case titled as “Gulzar Ahmed Azmi & Anr.
vs. Union of India & Ors.” WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO. 19 OF 2012, Mr. Justice
Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, speaking for the bench observed that:
“If the
prayer of the petitioners were to be accepted for
whatever grounds stated
in the petition and any such Committee is
directed to be
constituted that will only result
in making a roving inquiry into the various
criminal proceedings so far lodged connected with cases of bomb blasts
all over the country” [Para 8]
“Since criminal
cases registered in connection with various incidents are either pending trial
before the competent jurisdictional courts or being investigated by the
jurisdictional police, it is premature to
say whether any and if so which of the accused is innocent or has been
falsely implicated. If anyone is falsely
roped in any offence either under the provisions of Indian Penal Code or under
any other special enactments, by way of criminal proceeding, it is needless to state
that there are enough safeguards provided under the various laws and under the
criminal law jurisprudence, to protect the interest of any such person claiming
himself to be innocent and demonstrate before the concerned Fora that he has
been falsely implicated in any offence. Therefore, it will be for the concerned
individual against whom any criminal proceeding is lodged to work out his
remedy. For instance, if in any particular criminal case,
one wishes to
seek for further
investigation under Section 173 (8) of the Cr.P.C. the same can always be effected even after the filing of the
final report. Such a
power existing with the Investigating
Officer, having been
statutorily provided, it will be
a futile exercise if such a statutory exercise is to be entrusted with a supernumerary body
created under the head of a retired Judge of the Supreme Court along with
other team of officers
and experts. When the time tested Criminal Procedure Code
and other statutory provisions are working in the field
providing for such well laid down procedure to be followed in the
matter of regulating
such criminal proceedings, the
granting of the petitioners’ prayer
would amount to creating a
parallel body without any statutory sanction and to function only under some
directions of this Court which would
be lacking in very many
procedural details and will ultimately result
in utter chaos and confusion in
dealing with the
criminal proceedings which have already been lodged and
progressing before various criminal
courts. [Para 9]
See the entire judgement here: