Fixing probe timelines can be exception, not rule: Top court

Legal proceedings frequently intersect with the investigation and affect its pace and direction

- Abraham Thomas

Fixing timelines for completion of probe can be justified only in cases of undue delay or situations where it adversely affects liberty of citizens, the Supreme Court noted in a recent judgment as it set aside an order of the Allahabad high court that directed the police to complete a probe into arms licence forgery within three months.

The court's decision comes asa rider to the vast powers available to high courts under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue writs. The apex court reminded high courts to be alive to the practical realities of investigation where a time-bound probe should be imposed asa matter of exception and notasa norm.

Prescribing a “balanced approach”, a bench of justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh in its order dated December 19 said, “Timelines are therefore imposed at a point where not doing so would have adverse consequences i.e., there is material on record demonstrating undue delays, stagnation, or the like. In sum, timelines are imposed reactively and not prophylactically.”

It added: “Legal proceedings frequently intersect with the investigation and affect its pace and direction”, as sometimes an investigation of an offence could become a “long, winding road” making it unpredictable at times.