Constitution of India, 1950: Article 226-Quashing of criminal proceedings-Circumstances under which power could be exercised-Guidelines given.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 154, 155, 156, 157, 159-Cognizable offence-Field of investigation-Exclusive domain of investigating agencies-Court's interference-When justified.

Section 482-inherent powers of courts-Exercise of-Circumstances necessitating quashing of criminal proceedings-Guidelines indicated.

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947: Section 5-Investigation by designated officers-Express prohibition of officers below certain rank-Whether directory or mandatory-Exceptions only on adequate reasons-To be disclosed-Authorising such non_designated officers without reasons-Whether legal and valid-Investigation carried on by such officer-Quashing of.

Words & Phrases: "Reason to suspect"-Meaning of.

The First Respondent was a Minister and subsequently Chief Minister of Haryana State, Later he became Union Minister. On 12.11.1987 a complaint was presented before the Haryana Chief Minister, wherein serious allegations were levelled against the First Respondent. The main allegations were that he accumulated huge properties worth crores of rupees in the names of bis family members, relations and persons close to him by misusing his power and position and by undervaluing the market price, and all those transactions were benami in character. According to the complainant, since the accumulation of the properties by the First Respondent, in the shape of buildings, land, shares, ornaments etc. was far beyond his legal means, an investigation should be directed against him. 

The Chief Minister's Secretariat marked the complaint to the Director General of Police, who in torn endorsed the same to the Superintendent of Police concerned. On the direction from the Superintendent of Police, the SHO registered a case under Sections 161 and 165 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and took up the investigation. Meanwhile, the First Respondent filed a Writ Petition before the High Court for a direction to quash the First Information Report and for restraining the appellants from proceeding further with the investigation. The High Court quashed the entire criminal proceedings holding that the allegations did not constitute a cognizable offence for commencing lawful investigation. Aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court, the appellants preferred the present appeal by special leave, contending that the allegations contained in the complaint, either individually or collectively, constituted a cognizable offence warranting the registration of a case as contemplated under Section 154(1) Cr. P.C., and a thorough investigation in compliance with various statutory provisions more particularly Sections 156, 157 and 159 Cr. P.C. On behalf of the Respondents, it was contended that on account of the deep rooted political animosity and rivalry entertained by the then Chief Minister, he used the complainant, who was stooge in his hands, to file the complaint containing false and scurrilous allegations against the First Respondent and hence the criminal proceedings rightly deserved to be quashed.