Summary
- The Karnataka High Court has ruled that mere apprehension of bias is not enough to request the substitution of an Investigating Officer.
- The Court stated that a clear case of mala fides, demonstrable bias, lack of jurisdiction, or abuse of process must be established.
- This ruling emphasizes that individuals under investigation cannot demand an officer of their choice without substantial evidence.
- The decision could set a precedent for future cases regarding the conduct of investigations and the rights of those being investigated.
Join the discussion ā sign up to comment, upvote, and save articles.