IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-21379 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 18.7.2011 Amar Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present: Mr.S.K.Sud, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in which a prayer has been made to issue directions to the official respondents especially the respondent No.3 to arrest respondent No.4 for committing offences under Sections 457/380 IPC in case FIR No.82 dated 17.6.2011, P.S.Malour, District Muktsar. The petitioner in the narration of facts stated that respondent No.4 has stolen Rs.2 lacs and jewellery weighing 5 tolas from his house on 16.6.2011 and thus committed the theft. In the FIR which was registered he has stated that he had fixed the marriage of his son and in order to renovate his house he had withdrawn Rs.1,80,000/- from the bank and Rs.20,000/- which he had obtained after selling a buffalo, were lying in his locker along with 5 tolas of jedwellery. In the morning he noticed that the trunk Crl.Misc.No.M-21379 of 2011 (O&M) -2- was lying open and the clothes were scattered in the suit case and the aforesaid amount of Rs.2 lacs and 5 tolas jewellery had been taken away. He then named respondent No.4 Swarna Singh as the prime suspect for having committed the theft. The grievance which has now been made is that the police officials are not investigating the matter properly and said Swarna Singh has not been arrested and subjected to custodial interrogation. On due consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that the prayer made in the petition is completely misplaced. The Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has no authority to direct the investigation to be carried out in a particular way. The grievance of the petitioner that suspect Swarna Singh has not been subjected to custodial interrogation and thus the investigation is unfair, cannot be accepted for the simple reason that it is the investigating agency which is to determine whether a particular person is required to be subjected to custodial interrogation or not. . Unwarranted interference by the Court in the investigating process can always cause serious prejudice in the criminal justice dispensation system and it is not entirely necessary that every time a suspect is to be arrested and subjected to custodial interrogation. It is the job of the Investigating Officer to look into the FIR in the manner which is befitting the case and seriousness of the allegations set out therein. Accordingly, finding no merit in the petition, the same is dismissed. 18.7.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss