LexStreak
Read free →
Supreme Court of India· 21 September 2026

Can a constitutional court direct a fresh investigation by an independent agency where the original investigation was not conducted in a proper and objective manner?

Kusumavati Gowda v. The Government of Karnataka & Ors
2026 INSC 1030
Coram: Justice Sanjay Kumar · Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow Article 21 Constitution of India📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

A constitutional court can direct a fresh investigation by an independent agency where the original investigation was not conducted in a proper and objective manner.

A constitutional court can direct a fresh investigation by an independent agency where the original investigation was not conducted in a proper and objective manner. Such a court may also constitute a Special Investigating Team and direct authorities to assist it, and this power extends even after the trial has commenced (¶52, 55). Here, DNA-comparable material remained available and several potential witnesses were successfully traced within three weeks, showing the investigation had not been properly conducted and that reinvestigation would serve a real purpose (¶47, 48).

Headnote

Constitution of India — Art.21 — Art.20(2) — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s.300 — s.173(8) — Reinvestigation — Fair investigation — Double jeopardy — Constitution of India — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s.173(8) — Power to direct reinvestigation — Held: A constitutional court can direct a fresh investigation by an independent agency where the original investigation was not conducted in a proper and objective manner. Such power extends even after trial has commenced and the court may constitute a Special Investigating Team. (¶52, 54) Constitution of India — Art.21 — Fair investigation — Held further: A fair investigation is as much a part of the constitutional right under Article 21 as a fair trial. An investigation conducted in a tainted or biased manner requires the court to interfere to prevent a failure of justice. (¶54) Constitution of India — Art.20(2) — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s.300 — Double jeopardy — Held further: The protection of Article 20(2) and Section 300 CrPC bars trying an accused already tried and acquitted, even where reinvestigation is directed into the crime. The appeal was disposed of with a de novo investigation by a newly constituted Special Investigation Team. (¶61)

Headnote

You've used your free headnotes this month

The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.

Create my free account
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 52The Supreme Court in Neetu Kumar Nagaich (supra) held as under:
Paragraph 55Relying upon the decision in Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh (supra), the Supreme Court in Neetu Kumar Nagaich (supra) held that if deficiency in investigation or prosecution is visible or can be perceived by lifting the veil which try to hide the realities or covering the obvious deficiency, courts have to deal with the same with an iron hand appropriately within the framework of law. In order to ensure that the criminal prosecution is carried on without any deficiency, in appropriate cases this Court can even constitute Special Investigating Team and also give appropriate directions to the Central and State Governments and other authorities to give all required assistance to such specially constituted investigating team in order to book the real culprits and for effective conduct of the prosecution. And in exceptional circumstances the Court in order to prevent miscarriage of criminal justice and if considers necessary may direct for investigation de novo.
Acts & Sections
Article 21 Constitution of IndiaArticle 20(2) Constitution of Indias.300 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s.173(8) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of Kusumavati Gowda v. The Government of Karnataka & Ors — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Is a fair investigation as much a part of the constitutional right under Article 21 as a fair trial?Does the protection of Article 20(2) and Section 300 CrPC bar trying an accused a second time once already tried and acquitted?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections