R. K. DASH, J. Complaining, Governments frequent interference in the investigation of a criminal case registered under Section 302 I. P. C. and other allied offences, petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking quashing of the order dated 26-5-2001, Annexure-5 whereby the Government directed CBCID to reinvestigate the aforesaid case. 2. The petitioners case in brief is that on 21-12-1999 at about 9 p. m. Ranvendra Pratap Singh and seven others armed with various lethal weapons assaulted his brother Fizaul Haq alias Afsar (hereinafter refereed to as the deceased) and as a result, he died on the spot. The deceased was the Gram Pradhan and one of the accused namely, Rashid Nazeer was the Block Pramukh at the relevant time and since the deceased did not agree to the illegal demand of the accused persons he was done to death. On a report being lodged, the local police sprang into action, registered case No. 100 of 1999 under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 and 506 IPC and proceeded with the investigation, in course of which he examined and recorded the statement of the eye-witnesses seized empty cartridges, blood stained earth etc. , held the inquest over the dead-body of the deceased and sent the same for post-mortem examination and arrested one of the accused namely, Zahirddin. In the meanwhile, the State Government without any sufficient cause and reason transferred the investigation most arbitrarily by order dated 6-1-2000, copy whereof at Annexure-4, from the local police and entrusted to CBCID. No reason was assigned as to what necessitated the Government to interfere with the investigation and denude the local police of their power to investigate the case. Upon receipt of the record and the case diary, the investigation officer of the CBCID proceeded with investigation afresh and recorded the statement of the petitioner and other witnesses. He concluded the investigation, prepared the charge sheet against the accused persons and forwarded the same to his superior officer in September, 2001. Petitioner was of the impression that ultimately the accused persons would be put on trial and justice will be done. But he was shocked to find that the accused persons in order to subvert the process of law obtained order from the State Government, Annexure-5 with the help of their political mentors for reinvestigation of the case. Petitioner was of the impression that ultimately the accused persons would be put on trial and justice will be done. But he was shocked to find that the accused persons in order to subvert the process of law obtained order from the State Government, Annexure-5 with the help of their political mentors for reinvestigation of the case. It is urged that the State Government does not have any power to direct the police to reinvestigation the case nor the police have any such power under law. The aforesaid order, Annexure-5 was passed with apparent design to keep the accused persons beyond the reach of the Court. In view of such background facts and circumstances petitioner had no other alternative but to file this petition seeking Courts intervention. 3. A number of counter-affidavits sworn to by some police officers as well as Joint Secretary and Under Secretary, Home Department, Lucknow have been filed. One Anil Kumar Srivastava, S. O. Sultanpur Ghosh police station in his affidavit has stated that pursuant to the first information report dated 21-12- 1999, the then investigation officer recorded the statement of the witnesses Belal Ahmad and others, arrested co-accused Zahir Uddin and moved an application to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for arrest of the absconding accused persons. Having obtained order from the Magistrate, he took steps to arrest the absconding accused persons and in the meanwhile on the basis of the order of the State Government dated 6-1-2000 investigation was transferred to CBCID. 4. One J. P. Yadav, Inspector CBCID, Senior Allahabad in his affidavit has stated that after the case was transferred to CBCID he was entrusted with the investigation. Accordingly he proceeded with the investigation in course of which he recorded the statement of Belal Ahmad and others, whose statements were earlier recorded by the civil police. Since his investigation revealed involvement of other accused persons, he sent a report to the Additional Director General, CBCID for approval and after obtaining necessary orders he issued warrants for arrest of the accused persons to the concerned police station on 5-9-2001. In the meantime, the State Government by order dated 26-9-2001 stayed his hand and entrusted the case for reinvestigation by C. I. S. (1st) CBCID, Lucknow. On receipt of the order, he handed over the records to the transferee officer on 24-11-2001. In the meantime, the State Government by order dated 26-9-2001 stayed his hand and entrusted the case for reinvestigation by C. I. S. (1st) CBCID, Lucknow. On receipt of the order, he handed over the records to the transferee officer on 24-11-2001. In paragraph 24 of his counter- affidavit, he has asserted that it is the discretion of the investigating agency to get the matter either reinvestigation or further reinvestigated and either party has no right to approach the Court seeking for an order to entrust the investigation to any particular investigating agency. 5. Sita Ram, Inspector C. I. S. 1st, C. B. C. I. D. , Lucknow has filed two affidavits one, dated 11-2-2002 and the other dated 10-5- 2002. According to him, on receipt of the records of investigation earlier done by the Civil Police and C. B. C. I. D. Sector Allahabad, he proceeded with the investigation, visited the place of occurrence and recorded the statement of the witnesses to the memorandum of recovery. He also moved an application before the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Fatehpur to obtain the photocopy of the case diary and charge- sheet filed against co-accused Zahirddin. The Court accepted the prayer and made him available of the copies. Thereupon he commenced investigation and recorded statement of some witnesses. On 1-5-2002 he sent warrants by special messenger for arrest of the absconding accused persons to the Superintendent of Police, Fatehpur for execution by the local police. 6. Mohammad Yakoob Ansari, who is presently posted as Station Officer, Sultanpur Ghosh police station in his affidavit has reiterated what have been stated by Anil Kumar Srivastava, his pedecessor in office. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the affidavit, he has stated that C. I. S. 1st CBCID sent warrants dated 1-5-2002 for arrest of the absconding accused persons to the Superintendent of Police, Fatehpur, who in turn sent to him for execution. On receipt of the warrants, he searched for the absconding persons and ultimately on 11-5-2002 arrested and produced them before the Magistrate and made a report of their arrest to Superintendent of Police, Fatehpur for onward communication to C. I. S. 1st CBCID. In support of such contention he has filed the copy of the warrant dated 1-5-2002 and compliance report dated 11-5-2002 as Annexures S. C. A. 1 and 2 to the affidavit. 7. In support of such contention he has filed the copy of the warrant dated 1-5-2002 and compliance report dated 11-5-2002 as Annexures S. C. A. 1 and 2 to the affidavit. 7. We shall now refer to other affidavits sworn to by Under Secretariat and Joint Secretary, Home Department, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow. In paragraph 3 of the affidavit Sri N. C. Tripathi, Under Secretary, Home Department, has narrated that the Government vide order dated 6-1-2000 transferred the investigation from Civil Police to C. B. C. I. D. Sector Allahabad and in consequence thereof, one J. P. Singh Yadav investigated the case and submitted report to the Government for consideration. In the meanwhile, a complaint was received questioning the integrity and impartiality of Mr. Yadav. So, in order to have fair investigation the Government retransferred the investigation to the main Branch of C. B. C. I. D. Lucknow. 8. In course of hearing, we directed the learned Counsel appearing for the State to place concerned Government record where order was passed for reinvestigation of the case. Pursuant thereto, the record was placed before us on 18-3-2002 and upon perusal we noticed that on the request of Kunwar Raghuraj Pratap Singh alias Raja Bhaiya a Minister of the State Cabinet, the Chief Minister took immediate action and transferred the case for reinvestigation to another officer of the CBCID. We have come across many cases where on account of Governments interference, investigation was transferred from civil police. So, we directed Joint Secretary, Home Department to file affidavit as to in how many cases investigation was transferred from civil police to CBCID and vice versa by Governments order in the year 2001. Accordingly, Sri Barati Lal, Joint Secretary has filed short counter-affidavit stating that in the year 2001 about 700 cases were transferred from Civil Police to CBCID and 55 cases were retransferred to Civil Police. 9. The incident of the present case happened on 21-12-1999. It was alleged that accused persons brutally assaulted the deceased with lethal weapons and committed his murder. The FIR was lodged with all promptitude and the investigation commenced, in course of which witnesses were examined, autopsy was conducted and empty cartridges, blood stained earth etc. were seized. Within a forth night thereafter, on intervention of the Government, investigation was transferred to CBCID. The FIR was lodged with all promptitude and the investigation commenced, in course of which witnesses were examined, autopsy was conducted and empty cartridges, blood stained earth etc. were seized. Within a forth night thereafter, on intervention of the Government, investigation was transferred to CBCID. On perusal of the Governments file, we find that Mahendra Pratap Narain Singh, ex- MLA Fatehpur and member of the State Committee of BJP Uttar Pradesh addressed a letter to the Chief Minister requesting to transfer the investigation to CBCID. The Chief Minister accepted the prayer and passed orders accordingly and in obedience thereto, investigation, was entrusted to J. P. Singh Yadav, Inspector, CBCID, Allahabad Sector. There was no allegation against the investigating officer of the civil police questioning integrity and fairness. Yet he was divested of his statutory duties and investigation was transferred from him in a routine manner since it was complained that accused Ranvendra Pratap Singh alias Dhunni was got falsely involved due to political rivalry. 10. In our opinion, there was no justifiable reason for the Government to transfer the investigation to CBCID. It may be noted, way back in 1995 Government laid down guidelines for transfer of investigation to CBCID in exercise of administrative power and the same were taken note of by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Vopal and others v. State of U. P. & another, 1997 Cri. LJ. 2363. It may be noted, way back in 1995 Government laid down guidelines for transfer of investigation to CBCID in exercise of administrative power and the same were taken note of by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Vopal and others v. State of U. P. & another, 1997 Cri. LJ. 2363. The relevant part of the guidelines necessary for the purpose is reproduced hereunder: @hindi = "meemeve %eeve cew en Deeee nw efke Deveske ceeceueew cew Deveejemeke He mes Dehejeoe Devegmeboeeve efjeyeeie ke es Dehejeoeew ke er efjejesevee meewheer pee jner nw~ Fmeke e Heefjceece en nes jne nw efke Dehejeoe Devegbmeoeeve efjeyeeie cew efjejeseveeoeerve ceeceueew ke er mebkee ye{leer pee jner nw efpemekes Heefjceece mjehe Dehejeoe Devegmeboeeve efjeyeeie Ssmes ceeceueew ke er efjejesevee kes efues Yeer "erke mes mecee vener os Hee jne nw pees Jeemleje cew cenljehetce& nw Deewj efpeveke er efjejesevee Dehejeoe Devegbmeoeeve efjeyeeie eje ner mener eke ej mes nes meke leer nw~ keg ceeceueew cew en Yeer oskee ieee nw efke ueesie efjejesevee Dehejeoe Devegbmeoeeve-efjeyeeie ke es Fmeefues mleeveevleefjle ke j jns nq efke lelke eue eyeeje mes mleeveere efpeuee Hegefueme eje ke ee&jeener cew lee ke jw en eje=ef e Gefele vener nw Deewj Fme Hej lelke eue Debkeg Me ueieees peeves ke er Deejemeke lee nw~ @hindi = Deehe Dejeiele nw efke meceeve He mes cegke ocew ke er efjejesevee ke e ke ee& mleeveere Hegefueme eje ner efke ee peevee eeefns~ efke meer Yeer eke ej mes efjejesevee nsleg Dehejeoe Devegbmeoeeve efjeyeeie ke es mleeveevleefjle ke jves ke e emve leyeer G"vee eeefns peye efke Gmekes efues Heee&hle ke ejce nes~ en ke ejce efvecvejele nes meke les nq - @hindi = 1. Dehejeoe ke er eke =efle Fleveer peefue Deewj Heweeroieer mes Yejer nes efke mleeveere Hegefueme kes mlej Hej mes Gmeke er mener eke ej mes efjejesevee efke ee peevee mecyeje ve nes~ @hindi = 2. Dehejeoe Devleje jepe ee eosme Jeeheer ee Devlejcec[ueere / Heefj#es$eere nes~ @hindi = 3. mleeveere Heefjefmleefleeeb Ssmeer nes efke efpemekes ke ejce mleeveere Hegefueme eje efke meer ceeceues cew efve He e He mes peebe ke jvee cegefmke ue nes~ @hindi = 4. Ssmeer Heefjefmleefleeeb Glheve nes ieeer nes efke peve meeceeve kes efoceeie cew efke meer ceeceuew ke er efjejesevee ke es ueske j mleeveere Hegefueme ke er efve He#elee Hej emve efevn ueie ieee nes~. . . . Ssmeer Heefjefmleefleeeb Glheve nes ieeer nes efke peve meeceeve kes efoceeie cew efke meer ceeceuew ke er efjejesevee ke es ueske j mleeveere Hegefueme ke er efve He#elee Hej emve efevn ueie ieee nes~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. The aforesaid guidelines, in the present case, were not observed. Without assigning any reason, investigation was transferred and entrusted to CBCID which does not have infrastructure and sufficient manpower to investigate the case with reasonable speed and arrest the offender. It appears from the affidavit of Sri Yadav, Inspector, CBCID that he did not proceed with the investigation in the manner as provided in law. No attempt was made to collect further evidence and apprehend the accused persons. Laws were thrown to wind to help the accused persons. When there was credible evidence showing involvement of the accused persons in the killing of the deceased, Mr. Yadav ought to have taken immediate steps for their arrest, but he did not. He invented his own procedure, inasmuchas, he sent a report to Additional Director General of Police, CBCID for approval and after obtaining necessary orders, issued warrants to the concerned police station for the arrest of the accused persons. Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "the Code") does not lay down that investigating officer can arrest the accused only after obtaining approval from the superior officer. Section 157 of the Code which provides procedure for investigation envisages that the police officer in course of investigation shall take measures for discovery and arrest of the offender. So arrest of the person involved in the offence is a step to further the investigation. It is no doubt true that a superior police officer has power of superintendence over investigation of a case by sub-ordinate police officer as provided in Section 158, in as much as, the investigation report shall be rooted through him in order that he may give necessary instruction in the event, there is any defect or lacuna in the investigation. But in the absence of any statutory provision seeking approval of the superior officer to effect arrest, Sri Yadav ought not to have delayed the arrest of the accused persons against whom sufficient materials were available. But in the absence of any statutory provision seeking approval of the superior officer to effect arrest, Sri Yadav ought not to have delayed the arrest of the accused persons against whom sufficient materials were available. Besides on facts, we entertain doubt as to if warrant of arrest was at all sent by Sri Yadav to the local police for arrest of the accused persons. Both the Station Officers, namely, Mr. Srivastava and Md. Ansari in their affidavit do not say to have received any such warrant from the CBCID. All these circumstances persuade us to hold that either Sri Yadav was hand in gloves with the accused persons or on account of political interference, he did not arrest the accused persons involved in such heinous crime. 12. To repeat with, there was no progress in the investigation at the hands, of Mr. Yadav, Inspector, CBCID and steps taken by him were only paper work, yet with a view to delay the investigation for their ultimate benefit, the accused persons could succeed to obtain orders from the Government for reinvestigation of the case by another officer of the CBCID. From the file maintained by the Home Department, it appears that on intervention of Kunwar Raghuraj Pratap Singh alias Raja Bhaiya, a Minister , the Chief Minister directed for reinvestigation of the case. This order was put to action and case was transferred to the main branch of CBCID, Lucknow. The version of Mr. Sita Ram, third investigating officer is that having received the records he commenced the investigation and it is in progress. It transpires from the affidavit of the Station Officer, Sultanpur Ghosh P. S. that it was the third Investigating Officer who for arrest of the accused persons sent warrants, on receipt of which he apprehended the absconding accused persons on 11-5-2002. 13. We may reiterate that incident of murder happened in December, 1999 and the accused persons named in the FIR moved freely for about two and half years and no anxiety was shown by the police to arrest them. The investigating officers of the CBCID failed to discharge their duties and bring the culprits to book. It was only when this Court wanted to know the reason for not arresting the accused persons, the police on compelling necessity arrested them. The investigating officers of the CBCID failed to discharge their duties and bring the culprits to book. It was only when this Court wanted to know the reason for not arresting the accused persons, the police on compelling necessity arrested them. Needless to say, it is obligatory of the police to arrest an offender involved in the commission of a cognizance offence. If they fail to discharge such obligation either being influenced or pressurised by the executive or persons in helm of affairs, the Court cannot be a silent spectator and helplessly approve their action. 14. It cannot be gainsaid that police play vital role for maintaining an orderly society. Maintenance of law and order and crime detection are the primary functions of the police. The Legislature reposed trust on them and invested them with unbridled power as guardians of the society. But they betrayed the trust and it is complained, instead of extending helping hand to the person wronged, they on many occasion colluded with the accused. In heinous crimes they did not investigate in the manner as law demands and apprehend the culprit and it was mainly because of political interference. 15. In the present case, accused Ranvendra Pratap Singh alias Dhunni Singh has 13 criminals cases to his credit of which three are murder charges. He has the support of a Minister of the State Cabinet, who moved the Chief Minister to obtain order for reinvestigation of the case by another officer of the CBCID and without looking to the restriction imposed by the Government Order referred to above, his prayer was accepted. The investigation of the case moved like a pendulum from one officer to another and in the process the accused persons charged with heinous offence could not be apprehended for about two and an half years. There was absolutely no reason to denude the local police of their statutory function and entrust the same to CBCID, separate investigative agency created by the State. There is no denial of the fact that CBCID is not well equipped to investigate a case with all promptitude and arrest the offender. So, it is generally the accused who approaches the Government or the Court to transfer the investigation to CBCID and in the event he succeeds, his purpose to evade arrest is satisfied. 16. There is no denial of the fact that CBCID is not well equipped to investigate a case with all promptitude and arrest the offender. So, it is generally the accused who approaches the Government or the Court to transfer the investigation to CBCID and in the event he succeeds, his purpose to evade arrest is satisfied. 16. In the present case, as stated earlier, both the Investigating Officers of the CBCID did not show any anxiety to arrest the accused persons. When the Court intervened and wanted to know the reason of not arresting the culprits, it was only then arrest warrant was sent to local police after about two and half years of the incident to nab them. The accused persons moved freely and fearlessly since because they had support of the persons in power. Presently, criminals turned politicians rule the roost and restrain the police to perform their duties. They ask them to act in the manner which will benefit them. On the other, hand, when a criminal turned politician is involved in a case, he complains that he has been falsely implicated on account of political vendetta. Therefore, in order to clean the political field and to check the criminals to have easy access to politics, it is desirable that investigating wing of the police should be made independent and there should not be any surveillance or control by the executive on its functioning. 17. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case as discussed above, we direct the S. O. Sultanpur Ghosh police station to take up further investigation of the aforesaid case and complete the same within three months hence. Further investigation shall be taken up under the direct supervision of Superintendent of Police, Fatehpur District, Inspector. CIS 1st, CBCID, Lucknow shall return back the records of the investigation forthwith to S. O. Sultanpur Ghosh police station. With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Petition disposed of. .