In a recent decision concerning the jurisdictional scope of criminal investigations, the Supreme Court upheld a Karnataka High Court order directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe the alleged murder of Bengaluru-based realtor K Raghunath. The apex court’s judgment clarifies that once an FIR is registered and an investigation has commenced, the direction for further investigation by a specialized agency like the CBI cannot be contested by the accused or prospective suspects.
The bench, comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, ruled that the authority to assign a case to a specific investigative body rests solely with the judicial discretion of the court, particularly when the matter involves allegations of manipulation or the need for specialized scrutiny. Justice Mishra, delivering the judgment, stated:
“We are of the considered view that once an FIR is registered and investigation has taken place, direction for an investigation by the CBI is not open to challenge by the prospective suspect or accused. The matter for entrusting investigation to a particular agency is basically at the discretion of the Court.”
The case revolves around the mysterious death of K Raghunath, a prominent real estate developer with ties to late Member of Parliament DK Adikeshavalu (DKA). Raghunath's sudden demise in 2019 was surrounded by suspicion, with his wife and son alleging foul play and implicating DKA’s children and associates. Initial reluctance from the local police to register an FIR led to a private complaint filed by Raghunath's wife, Manjula, which resulted in the registration of multiple charges including murder (Section 302), criminal conspiracy (Section 120B), and various sections related to forgery and cheating.
The Karnataka High Court had earlier quashed a magistrate's order directing further investigation by the HAL police station, citing jurisdictional concerns. The court, however, ordered the CBI to take over the case due to lapses in the initial investigation and the possibility of local interference. The CBI subsequently registered fresh FIRs and conducted raids at the residences of several accused parties.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court emphasized the gravity of the case, particularly given the complex property disputes and the execution of two conflicting wills prior to Raghunath’s death. “There are civil proceedings relating to mutation and declaration of title as well as the allegations concerning forgery of stamp papers,” the bench noted.
However, the court refrained from further discussing the defects in the prior investigation to prevent any influence on the CBI's work. It asserted, “The truth surrounding the death of K Raghunath needs to be settled after a complete and fair investigation by the CBI, which, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, has rightly been directed by the High Court.”
The bench’s judgment concluded with a directive that the CBI complete its investigation within eight months, and that all relevant case files be handed over to the CBI within 15 days. Additionally, should the CBI file a chargesheet, it must be submitted to the jurisdictional CBI court in Karnataka.
Picture Source :
