SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a writ petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into an alleged high-value burglary at the residence of two senior academicians, upholding the decision of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Srinagar, to close the case. The court ruled that no legal infirmity was found in the CJM’s order and reiterated that magistrate-level courts lack jurisdiction to transfer investigations to the CBI or other independent agencies.
The petition had been filed by Dr Noor Mohammad Bilal, 73, and his wife Dr Shahnaz, 57, residents of Naseem Bagh, Hazratbal, who claimed they were victims of a burglary while away on Umrah pilgrimage in April 2022. According to the petitioners, burglars broke into their home and stole gold jewellery worth over Rs 75 lakh and cash of Rs 4.5 lakh. FIR No. 35/2022 under Sections 457 and 380 IPC was registered at Police Station Nigeen on April 9, 2022.
Following dissatisfaction with the progress of investigation, the couple moved an application under Section 153-C CrPC before the CJM, seeking monitoring of the police probe. The SDPO was directed to appear with the case diary. Later, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) filed a charge sheet and named some accused. However, the petitioners claimed the investigation was flawed, incomplete, and failed to identify or recover the stolen goods from the actual culprits.
Subsequently, a protest petition was filed on December 21, 2023, requesting a fresh investigation by a different and independent agency. The CJM, however, disposed of the protest petition on January 29, 2025, ruling that the magistrate’s court lacked authority to order investigation by agencies like the CBI under Section 173(8) CrPC.
The petitioners then approached the High Court seeking to overturn the CJM’s order and demanding a reinvestigation by a “reliable and credible” agency. Their counsel argued that the trial court had failed to exercise its authority to ensure justice and that the SIT’s probe was inadequate and compromised. They sought recovery of stolen articles and alleged bias or failure by the local police.
However, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal of the High Court, after hearing both parties, held that the magistrate’s decision was well within the legal framework. Citing multiple Supreme Court rulings, the court held that subordinate courts do not have the power to direct investigations by specialized agencies such as the CBI or CID. It noted that such powers are reserved for constitutional courts, High Courts and the Supreme Court, and only in rare and exceptional cases.
The judgment referred to landmark cases including K.V. Rajendran v. Superintendent of Police, CBI v. Rajesh Gandhi, and Mithilesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan, to emphasize that a mere grievance or dissatisfaction with police investigation is not sufficient ground to transfer a probe. The court underlined that any such transfer must be based on demonstrable evidence of bias, incompetence, or malafide intent by the investigating agency.
Justice Nargal further observed that the petitioners’ plea lacked any material showing procedural illegality or miscarriage of justice. The court noted that the police had already filed a final report and that the magistrate had no jurisdiction to direct a change in the investigating agency. Even the High Court’s own jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC must be exercised sparingly and only when the facts of the case point to manifest injustice, which was not evident in this matter.
In his concluding remarks, Justice Nargal said that the principle of “discovery of truth” must guide investigations, but that courts must avoid stepping into the executive domain unless legally and factually justified. He held that the petitioners’ reliance on dissatisfaction alone was not sufficient to invoke the court’s extraordinary powers and that the trial court had committed no error in law.
With this, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, affirmed the CJM’s order dated January 29, 2025, and declined to interfere with the investigation already concluded by the local police authorities.
