Supreme Court of India
MANDAKINI DIWAN AND ANR.versusTHE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.
- Citation
- 2024 INSC 666
- Decided
- 6 September 2024
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
- Bench
- VIKRAM NATH
Holding
The Supreme Court held that, given the allegations of bias and the need to ensure a fair investigation, it was appropriate to direct the CBI to investigate, thereby setting aside the High Court's dismissal.
Summary
The appellants, mother and brother of Ranjana Diwan, alleged that her death in 2016, officially recorded as suicide, was suspicious due to six ante‑mortem injuries and possible influence by her husband, a senior judicial officer, over the police investigation. They filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a fair inquiry and the appointment of an independent agency, but the Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed it, holding that a remedy under Section 156(3) of the CrPC was available. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court erred in refusing to order a CBI investigation and whether the Court’s extraordinary power to direct such an inquiry could be exercised. Relying on precedents that the power to transfer investigations to the CBI must be used sparingly but is justified to ensure fairness and protect fundamental rights, the Court found the allegations of bias warranted an independent probe. Consequently, the Court set aside the High Court order and directed the CBI to conduct a complete and fair investigation, with the State to cooperate, while leaving the merits of the case to the investigating agency.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition should have been dismissed on the ground that the remedy under Section 156(3) CrPC was sufficient.
- Whether the Supreme Court can exercise its power under Articles 226 and 136 to direct a CBI investigation in a case involving alleged bias by a senior judicial officer.
- Whether the circumstances of the case justify the sparing use of the Court's power to transfer investigation to the CBI.
- Whether the fundamental right to a fair investigation mandates intervention by an independent agency.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 156(3), s. 174
- Constitution of Indias. 136, s. 226
Subjects
Investigation by independent agencySuicidePost mortemFair investigationStatutory remedyDirect CBI to conduct investigation
Judgment
[2024] 9 S.C.R. 86 : 2024 INSC 666
Mandakini Diwan and Anr.
v.
The High Court of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
(Criminal Appeal No. 3738 of 2024)
06 September, 2024
[Vikram Nath* and Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Matter pertains to investigation as regards the suspicious death
of the wife of senior judicial officer.
Headnotes†
Constitution of India – Arts. 226, 136 – Investigation by
independent agency – Death of the wife of senior judicial
officer – Case of the appellants-mother and the brother of the
deceased that the death was suspicious and was not a case
of simple suicide, and apprehended that the husband being a
senior judicial officer had managed the post mortem in which
the cause of death was shown to be suicide by hanging –
Several complaints by appellants – Neither FIR registered nor
fair investigation carried out – Writ petition by the appellants,
remained pending for seven years, and thereafter, dismissed
holding that the appellants had adequate statutory remedy
available u/s. 156(3) CrPC – Challenge to:
Held: Power to direct CBI to conduct investigation is to be exercised
sparingly and such orders should not be passed in routine manner –
On facts, the aggrieved party raised allegations of bias and undue
influence on the police machinery of the State – Considering
the fact that the husband is a senior judicial officer any doubt or
apprehension in the minds of the appellants who have lost their
family member may be dispelled by the investigation being carried
out by CBI – This may result into doing complete justice and
enforcing the fundamental right of getting a fair investigation – Thus,
the impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside – CBI
directed to carry out complete and fair investigation and proceed
in accordance with law into the incident and that too expeditiously
considering the fact that the incident is of 2016 and submit a report
to this Court – If CBI finds that FIR needs to be registered, it may
* Author
[2024] 9 S.C.R. 87
Mandakini Diwan and Anr. v. The High Court of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
itself do so and proceed accordingly and bring such complaint to
a logical conclusion – However, if the CBI comes to the conclusion
that there is no material which it could collect which is not sufficient
in ordinary course to submit a chargesheet, it would close the
proceedings. [Paras 12, 14, 15]
Case Law Cited
Awungshi Chirmayo vs. Government of NCT of Delhi (2022) SCC
Online SC 1452 – referred to.
List of Acts
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Constitution of India.
List of Keywords
Investigation by independent agency; Suicide; Post mortem; Fair
investigation; Statutory remedy; Direct CBI to conduct investigation.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 3738
of 2024
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.05.2023 of the High Court
of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in WPCR No. 197 of 2016
Appearances for Parties
Dinesh Jotwani, Dhawesh Pahuja, Bhargava Baisoya, Ms. Ekta
Gambhir, Ms. Shruti Singh, Ms. Shivalika Midha, Narendra Bahadur
Tiwari, Nilesh Sharma, Saket Gogia, Advs. for the Appellants.
Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G.,
Avdhesh Kumar Singh, A.A.G., Ms. Anjana Prakash, Mrs. Swarupama
Chaturvedi, Sr. Advs., Prashant Singh, Rajat Nair, Mrs. Prerna
Dhall, Piyush Yadav, Ms. Akanksha Singh, Alok Sahay, Himanshu
Shekhar, Parth Shekhar, Ms. Ambali Vedasen, Shubham Singh,
Ms. Rachna Ranjan, Ms. Sarita Kumari, Ritesh Kumar Gupta, T.V.
Surendranath, Atul Arvind, Sudip Patra, Ms. Kamlika Samadder,
Arvind Kumar Tomar, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Ms. Ruchi Kohli,
Ms. Shagun Thakur, Ms. Ruchi Gaur Narula, Santosh Kumar,
Navanjay Mahapatra, Apoorv Kurup, Ms. Nidhi Mittal, Ms. Gauri
Goburdhun, Ms. Aanchal, Akhil Hasija, Gurjas Singh Narula, Advs.
for the Respondents.
88 [2024] 9 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Vikram Nath, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal assails the correctness of the order dated 10.05.2023
passed by the Division Bench of High Court of Chhattisgarh in
W.P.Cr. No.197 of 2016 titled as Mandakini Diwan & Anr. vs. High
Court of Chhattisgarh and seven others whereby the writ petition was
dismissed with liberty to the petitioners therein (appellants herein) to
avail the appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum.
3. Before referring to the facts we wish to make it clear that we are not
entering into the detailed facts and submissions as advanced by the
parties because any observation made by us on such submissions and
detailed facts may result into influencing a fair investigation which we
are inclined to direct in the present case by an independent agency.
4. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are:
4.1. The respondent no. 7 had applied in the Higher Judicial
Services of the State of Chhattisgarh against the advertisement
issued in the year 2012. Pursuant to which he was selected
and appointed in June 2013 as Addl.District Judge, Geedam
at Dantewada. Respondent no. 7 got married to the deceased
on 15.02.2014. However, they had known each other since
2010. The deceased was working as Asstt. District Prosecution
Officer. At the relevant time they were posted at Dantewada.
4.2. On 12.05.2016, in the evening at about 10:30 PM the appellants
who are mother and the brother of the deceased received a
phone call that Ms. Ranjana Diwan had committed suicide.
Immediately they rushed from Bilaspur to Dantewada and
tried to figure out as to what had happened. According to the
appellants they were not provided with the post mortem report.
4.3. It is the case of the appellants that there was something fishy
in the death of Ms. Ranjana Diwan and it was not a case of
simple suicide. It was also their apprehension that respondent
no. 7 having sufficient influence being a senior judicial officer
had managed the post mortem in which the cause of death
was shown to be suicide by hanging.
[2024] 9 S.C.R. 89
Mandakini Diwan and Anr. v. The High Court of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
4.4. The post-mortem report further indicated that the deceased
had six ante-mortem injuries on her body. The information of
suicide was given to the Dantewada Police Station, a Merg was
registered under section 174 of Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973.1 On 13.05.2016, the police made recoveries, the copy of
which is filed as Annexure -P/2. The post-mortem was conducted
on 13.05.2016 at 06:30 PM. The cause of death was reported
to be asphyxia due to hanging. Further, six ante-mortem injuries
were reported which are as follows:
“Injuries:
1) A contusion present over back of right hand ~ 3.5
cm x 3 cm bluish.
2) A contusion present over left ring finger over proximal
phalanx palmer aspect, ~ 1.5 cm x 1 cm, bluish.
3) A contusion present over right leg~ 3 cm below knee~
4 cm x 3.5 cm, bluish.
4) A contusion present over the left foot dorsal aspect
~ 1.5 cm x 1.5 cm bluish.
5) A contusion present over left thigh ~ 17 cm below
groin, ~ 4 cm x 4.3 cm bluish.
6) Ligature mark: A brown parchment like hard ligature
mark present over neck above the level of thyroid
cartilage, obliquely extending upward toward chin,
from behind, grooved at places. Maximum breadth
~ 4.5 cm on the backside. Peeling of skin evident
in marks at places. Mark is situated 1.5 cm below
tip of chin, 5.5 cm below tip of left mastoid, & 4 cm
below tip of right mastoid, 10 cm below occiput. Mark
is faint for ~3 cm on the right side. On dissection
corresponding under the surface of skin is glistering
white. Hyoid bone and thyroid cartilage intact.
All the injuries are ante mortem and are of within
06 hours of death. Injury no. 6 is sufficient to cause
instantaneous death in the ordinary course of nature.
Metallic rings in each 2nd toe.”
1 CrPC
90 [2024] 9 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
4.5. According to the appellants, the Police filed the closure report
treating it to be a case of suicide. The appellants repeatedly
continued to represent to the authorities for a fair investigation
after registering First Information Report. All the complaints
made by the appellants to the authorities did not result in the
registering of FIR against respondent no. 7. All the complaints
though were inquired into but were ultimately closed as a result
of the influence exerted by the respondent no. 7. Till date, neither
FIR has been registered on the several complaints made by
the appellants nor a fair investigation has been carried out in
order to find out the truth.
4.6. Left with no alternative, the appellants filed writ petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India registered as W.P. Crl.
No. 197 of 2016 praying for the following reliefs:
"10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may be kind enough in
issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus, certiorari
of likewise any other appropriate writ commanding
and directing the respondents to produce all the
records related with the case of the petitioners for
just and proper decision of this case.
10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may be kind enough in
issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus, certiorari or
likewise any other appropriate writ, commanding and
directing the respondent No. 8 to lodge a separate
FIR or to take investigation of merg No. 24/16 of
the Police Station, Geedam, District Dantewada
and after due investigation the report may kindly
be submitted before the Hon’ble Court.
10.3 That, this’ Hon’ble Court may be kind enough to
issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus, certiorari
or likewise any other appropriate writ, commanding
and directing respondents No. 2 to 6 to hand over
all the records related with the case of death of
deceased Ranjana Diwan, wife of Manvendra
Singh, the respondent No. 7 for just and proper
investigation, enquiry into the matter.
10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may be kind enough in
issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus, certiorari
[2024] 9 S.C.R. 91
Mandakini Diwan and Anr. v. The High Court of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
or likewise any other appropriate writ, commanding
and directing the respondent No. 1 to keep the
respondent No. 7 out of the job till the final decision
of the case so that there may be no influence In the
investigation by the respondent No. 7.
10.5 Any other relief, which the Hon’ble Court deems fit
and proper looking to the facts and circumstances
of the case, may also be granted.”
4.7. In the petition before the High Court, respondent no. 1 is the High
Court of Chhattisgarh, respondent no. 2 is State of Chhattisgarh
through Secretary, Department of Home, respondent no. 3 is the
Director General of Police, respondent no. 4 is Inspector General
of Police Headquarters, respondent no. 5 is Superintendent of
Police, Dantewada, respondent no. 6 is Station House Officer,
Police Station Geedam, District Dantewada, respondent no. 7
is the husband of the deceased and respondent no. 8 is the
Central Bureau of Investigation.
4.8. The said petition remained pending for about seven years. By
the impugned order the High Court has dismissed the said
petition. According to the High Court the appellants had adequate
statutory remedy available under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.
by approaching the Magistrate concerned.
5. The submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellants is that
it is true that appellant had a remedy of filing a complaint under
section 156(3) Cr.P.C. but considering the fact that the respondent
no. 7 is senior judicial officer and had already exercised his influence
on the administration in ensuring that FIR is not registered and no
free and fair investigation be carried out, they had little hope rather
no hope of getting any justice from the Court of a Magistrate who
would be an officer subordinate to respondent no. 7. It is for this
reason that they had approached the High Court under Article 226
of the Constitution of India.
6. Before us, detailed arguments have been advanced by the appellants
to show the high handedness of the respondent no. 7 in influencing
the administration in not registering the FIR despite there being
suspicious circumstances resulting in the death of daughter of the
appellant no. 1 and sister of appellant no. 2, more particularly there
92 [2024] 9 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
being no explanation for the six ante mortem injuries. It was therefore
submitted that this Court may direct for an independent agency to
investigate into the matter.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for State of Chhattisgarh
submitted that detailed inquiry was carried out and statements of
more than 50 witnesses were recorded; that every complaint filed
by the appellant was enquired into at the highest level but when no
evidence could be found against respondent no. 7, the complaints
were closed. It is also his submission that the appellants are
unnecessarily doubting the credibility of the investigating agency of
the State of Chhattisgarh and it also amounts to putting a blame not
only on the respondent no. 7 but also on the entire police machinery
of the State of Chhattisgarh.
8. Learned counsel also referred to the details as to how the complaints
have been dealt with. It was thus submitted that the appeal be
dismissed and the appellants be left at liberty to approach the
Magistrate under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
9. Learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent no. 7 also
had similar submissions as were made on behalf of the State of
Chhattisgarh. In addition, it was submitted that respondent no. 7
being a judicial officer having a good reputation is being unnecessarily
targeted by the appellants for ulterior motives. A very thorough and
fair inquiry was carried out in which no complicity of the respondent
no. 7 could be found.
10. It was further submitted that in all the enquiries made, no incriminating
material could be collected against the respondent no. 7 and as such
the complaints were rightly closed. By filing the writ petition and the
present appeal the only attempt of the appellants is to somehow or
the other not only tarnish the image of the respondent no. 7 but also
cause unnecessary harassment and jeopardize his service. Further,
a direction to appoint CBI to investigate is also not warranted in the
present case and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.
11. Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General appearing for the CBI
submitted that whatever order the Court passes the same would
be complied with. He also suggested that the Court may consider
appointing a high-level Special Investigation Team or in the alternative
may direct the CBI to investigate the matter as this will provide
[2024] 9 S.C.R. 93
Mandakini Diwan and Anr. v. The High Court of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
credibility and instill confidence not only in the aggrieved party but
also in the society at large.
12. Considering the fact that the respondent no. 7 is a senior judicial
officer any doubt or apprehension in the minds of the appellants who
have lost their family member may be dispelled by the investigation
being carried out by CBI. This may result into doing complete justice
and enforcing the fundamental right of getting a fair investigation.
13. In the case of Awungshi Chirmayo vs. Government of NCT of
Delhi 2 this Court directed CBI to hold enquiry in the criminal matter
related to murder of two cousins due to certain puzzling facts including
inconclusive post mortem report. It held as follows:
"13. In a seminal judgment reported as State of West Bengal
v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West
Bengal (2010) 3 SCC 571, this Court has discussed in detail
inter alia the circumstances under which the Constitutional
Courts would be empowered to issue directions for CBI
enquiry to be made. This Court noted that the power to
transfer investigation should be used sparingly, however,
it could be used for doing complete justice and ensuring
there is no violation of fundamental rights. This is what
the Court said in Para 70:
“Insofar as the question of issuing a direction to
CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned,
although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down
to decide whether or not such power should be
exercised but time and again it has been reiterated
that such an order is not to be passed as a matter
of routine or merely because a party has levelled
some allegations against the local police. This
extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly,
cautiously and in exceptional situations where it
becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil
confidence in investigations or where the incident
may have national and international ramifications or
where such an order may be necessary for doing
2 (2022) SCC Online SC 1452
94 [2024] 9 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
complete justice and enforcing the fundamental
rights…”
14. The powers of this Court for directing further investigation
regardless of the stage of investigation are extremely
wide. This can be done even if the chargesheet has been
submitted by the prosecuting agency. In the case of Bharati
Tamang v. Union of India (2013) 15 SCC 578, this Court
allowed the Writ Petition filed by the widow of late Madan
Tamang who was killed during a political clash and directed
investigation by the CBI which would be monitored by
the Joint Director, CBI. The following observations were
made in Para 44:
"44. Whether it be due to political rivalry or personal
vengeance or for that matter for any other motive
a murder takes place, it is the responsibility of the
police to come up to the expectation of the public at
large and display that no stone will remain unturned
to book the culprits and bring them for trial for being
dealt with under the provisions of the criminal law of
prosecution. Any slackness displayed in that process
will not be in the interest of public at large and
therefore as has been pointed out by this Court in the
various decisions, which we have referred to in the
earlier paragraphs, we find that it is our responsibility
to ensure that the prosecution agency is reminded
of its responsibility and duties in the discharge of its
functions effectively and efficiently and ensure that
the criminal prosecution is carried on effectively and
the perpetrators of crime are duly punished by the
appropriate court of law.”
15. This Court has expressed its strong views about the need
of Courts to be alive to genuine grievances brought before
it by ordinary citizens as has been held in Zahira Habibulla
H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat (2004) 4 SCC 158.
16. It is to observe that unresolved crimes tend to erode
public trust in institutions which have been established
for maintaining law and order. Criminal investigation
must be both fair and effective. We say nothing on the
[2024] 9 S.C.R. 95
Mandakini Diwan and Anr. v. The High Court of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
fairness of the investigation appears to us, but the fact
that it has been ineffective is self evident. The kith and
kin of the deceased who live far away in Manipur have
a real logistical problem while approaching authorities in
Delhi, yet they have their hope alive, and have shown
trust and confidence in this system. We are therefore of
the considered view that this case needs to be handed
over to CBI, for a proper investigation and also to remove
any doubts in the minds of the appellants, and to bring
the real culprits to justice.
17. In view of the discussion made above, the order of the
Delhi High Court dated 18.05.2018, dismissing the prayer
of the present appellants to transfer the investigation to
CBI is hereby set aside. The appeal is hereby allowed and
we direct that CBI to hold enquiry in the matter. The case
shall be transferred from SIT to the CBI. The SIT, which
has so far conducted the investigation in the matter, will
hand over all the relevant papers and documents to CBI
for investigation. After a thorough investigation, CBI will
submit its complete investigation report or charge sheet
before the concerned court as expeditiously as possible.””
14. It is true that power to direct CBI to conduct investigation is to
be exercised sparingly and such orders should not be passed in
routine manner. In the present case, the aggrieved party has raised
allegations of bias and undue influence on the police machinery of
the State of Chhattisgarh. Coupled with the fact that the thorough,
fair and independent investigation needs to be carried out to find out
the truth about the whole incident and in particular about the ante
mortem injuries. We are of the view that such a direction needs to
be issued in the present case.
15. We accordingly allow this appeal, set aside the impugned order
passed by the High Court and further direct the CBI-respondent no. 8
to carry out complete and fair investigation and proceed in accordance
to law into the incident and that too expeditiously considering the
fact that the incident is of 2016 and submit a report to this Court.
If the CBI finds that an FIR needs to be registered, it may itself do
so and proceed accordingly and bring such complaint to a logical
conclusion. However, if the CBI comes to the conclusion that there
96 [2024] 9 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
is no material which it could collect which is not sufficient in ordinary
course to submit a chargesheet, it would close the proceedings. The
State of Chhattisgarh is directed to extend all cooperation to the CBI
in conducting the investigation and provide all necessary papers and
other strategic support to the CBI as may be required.
16. We make it clear that we have not made any observation on merit.
However, still we clarify that any observation made in this judgment will
not influence the investigation by the CBI. The appeal is accordingly
allowed.
Result of the case: Appeal Allowed.
†
Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Investigation by independent agency"Sign in to search