81 , 2013 (129 )AIC1 (S.C. ), 2013 (4 )AJR576 , 2013 (82 ) ACC 958 , 2014 (1 ) ALT (Crl.) 187 (A.P.), III (2013 )CCR636 (SC ), 2013 CriLJ4464 , 2013 (4 )Crimes50 (SC ), 2013 (5 )CTC310 , 2013 INSC 545 , 2013 (4 )J.L.J.R.582 , 2014 (1 )PLJR40 , 2013 (4 )RCR(Criminal)745 , 2013 (10 )SCALE513 , (2013 )12 SCC480 , [2013 ]9 SCR199 , ,MANU/SC/0842/2013B.S. Chauhan#S.J. Mukhopadhaya#Kurian Joseph#3128SC4630Judgment/OrderAD#AIC#AJR#Allahabad Criminal Cases#ALT (Criminal)#CCR#CriLJ#Crimes#CTC#INSC#JLJR#MANU#PLJR#RCR (Criminal)#SCALE#SCC#SCRB.S. Chauhan,SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2013-8-2316810,17483,16599,17060,17163 -->

MANU/SC/0842/2013

True Court CopyTM English

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1167 of 2013

Decided On: 21.08.2013

Appellants: K.V. Rajendran Vs. Respondent: Superintendent of Police, CBCID South Zone, Chennai and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
B.S. Chauhan, S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Kurian Joseph

JUDGMENT

B.S. Chauhan, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 8.12.2011 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Crl.O.P. No. 9639 of 2011, by way of which the High Court has rejected the prayer of the Appellant to transfer the investigation of his case/complaint to Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as the 'CBI').

2. The case has a chequered history as the matter has moved from the court of the Magistrate to this Court time and again. Facts and circumstances necessary to adjudicate upon the controversy involved herein are that:

A. The Appellant, who is an Associate Professor in Physics in the Presidency College, Chennai, went to his village on 26.8.1998. At about 11.00 P.M., approximately ten people headed by the then Revenue Divisional Officer (hereinafter referred to as the 'RDO'), forcibly took him in a government jeep and brought him to the Taluk office and enquired about why he had given a false complaint regarding the smuggling of teakwood in that area. The then RDO and other officials treated him with utmost cruelty and caused severe injuries all over his body and then obtained his signatures on blank papers which were filled up as directed by the then RDO. On the next day, he was handed over to the local Police Inspector along with the statement purported to have been written by the officials concerned.

B. The Appellant was produced before the Magistrate on 27.8.1998 at 10.30 A.M. and he was remanded to judicial custody. His request to the Judicial Magistrate in regard to medical examination of the injuries which had been caused to him was rejected. The Appellant was kept in Sub Jail, Porayar, wherein he was treated by the jail doctor on 28.8.1998. On being released on bail, the Appellant got treatment of his injuries in a private hospital.

C. The Appellant filed a complaint against the said RDO and other officials. The said complaint was also sent to the office of Hon'ble Chief Minister of the State, the Director General of Police and other officials, alleging the brutal torture caused to him by the then RDO. The case was entrusted for investigation to Deputy Superintendent of Police, SBCID, Nagapattinam. A confidential report was forwarded to higher officials by the said DSP in this regard. However, no progress could be made in the investigation and no case was