A defect or irregularity in investigation, however serious, has no direct bearing on the competence or procedure relating to cognizance or trial. Therefore, where the cognizance of the case has in fact been taken and the case has proceeded to termination, the invalidity of the precedent investigation does not vitiate the result unless a miscarriage of justice has been caused thereby. The defect or irregularity in investigation has no bearing on the competence of the court or procedure relating to cognizance or trial. [Para 8] [259-D-E] 2.2 In the instant case, the Investigating officer has mentioned in the FIR itself that he had orally been directed by the Superintendent of Police to investigate the case. There is nothing on record to show that the officer's statement is not factually correct. It is evident that there was a direction by the Superintendent of Police to the concerned officer to investigate the case. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the issue as to whether the oral order could meet the requirement of law remains merely a technical issue.

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988