AI-generated summary
The Bombay High Court had refused to grant an extension of time to file a chargesheet against a PFI member, after which the accused were granted default bail. The Supreme Court was hearing an appeal against this order.
Representative image
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Monday said investigation of a crime was the police's exclusive domain and should be left to the investigating agency's discretion, and courts should not interfere to decide when a probe should stop. Quashing a Bombay High Court order which had refused to grant an extension of time to file a chargesheet against a Popular Front of India (PFI) member, after which the accused were granted default bail, a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar said the HC committed an error in not granting more time to the anti-terrorism squad of Mumbai police to complete the probe. "Investigation of a crime is the exclusive domain of the police. It is not the jurisdiction of the court to decide when the investigation in a case should stop. It must be left to the discretion of the investigating agency to decide the course of investigation and to proceed in its own manner. The court cannot curtail the statutory powers vested in the police except in an exceptional case on facts or where there is a statutory bar to carry out investigation by the police," the bench said.
It added that courts cannot interfere with the statutory right of the police to investigate the circumstances of a cognisable crime and it was the bounden duty of the executive, through the police department, to investigate the offence and bring the offender to book. "The probe agency sought time to analyse how data retrieved from mobiles, computers and other gadgets seized from the accused connect them with the terrorist activities intended to undermine the sovereignty of India. The agency is also required to indicate how the flow of money in the bank accounts of the accused connects them with the terrorist activities." SC quashed the default bail granted to the accused and asked them to surrender within 30 days.
End of Article
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
The accused will surrender to authorities within the 30-day period specified by the Supreme Court.
Likely · Within days
The Mumbai Police will file a chargesheet against the accused after completing their investigation.
Very likely · Within weeks

During the hearing of the petition challenging the provision of punishment for not singing all the intars of Vande Mataram, the Supreme Court said that if a person does not sing the song for religious reasons, then no action can be taken against him. Citing the decision of the Bijou Emmanuel case, the court said that standing to honor the national anthem is sufficient, singing is not necessary.

Uber has been ordered to pay $40 million (Rs 380 crore) compensation to the family of 23-year-old Emily Normandin-Parker, who was killed after she was flagged down by an Uber driver on a California highway.
India's Supreme Court held that personal liberty under Article 21 cannot be invaded except according to constitutionally established procedure, even for serious crimes, emphasizing that arrest grounds must be communicated in writing and in a language understandable to the accused, and re-arrest after illegal detention requires senior police approval and court nod.
The Supreme Court of India criticized the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and its appellate and appellate NCLAT for operating from dilapidated buildings with leaking roofs, poor infrastructure, and severe vacancies in members and support staff, stating the situation is unacceptable given their role in handling Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code cases involving thousands of crores of rupees.
Satish Salian, father of the late Disha Salian, has served a legal notice to Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Aaditya Thackeray, demanding a public apology and Rs 500 crore in damages, citing defamation and alleged threats against his legal counsel.
Sikh Spiritual Centre Toronto and Nanaksar Thath Ishar Darbar face a lawsuit over $13 million in loans arranged by former MP Rajvinder Grewal's law firm. Lenders allege improper security registration, adding to over $200 million in civil claims against the firm.