The widow of a man who died after being "restrained" by police in High Wycombe has failed in a High Court bid to re-start an independent investigation into the case.

Mussrat Habib said the Independent Police Complaints Commission should re-start its probe into the death of Habib Ullah as the police officers involved should have been questioned under full caution. This would leave open the option of criminal prosecution, her lawyers argued.

Yet the court found while the IPCC believes there is no evidence to justify a criminal prosecution, "the door is not closed" to the decision being reconsidered once the investigation is complete.

Family man Mr Ullah was aged 39 when a car in which he was a passenger was stopped by police in the Sharrow Vale area of High Wycombe on July 3 last year.

Officers searched the car and its three occupants and, when one of the officers noticed that Mr Ullah had a lump in his cheek, he suspected he might to concealing drugs in his mouth.

When he refused to spit out what was in his mouth, officers restrained him and top judge, Mr Justice Collins, said that involved "various forcible actions", including slapping him on the back, holding a hand to his neck and manipulating his jaw.

Once on the ground Mr Ullah "went limp" and, although he was taken to hospital by ambulance, he suffered a cardiac arrest and died, London's High Court heard.

Unbeknown to his family, Mr Ullah, from Slough, had previous drugs-related convictions and an autopsy revealed one package of crack cocaine in his colon and another in his throat. His family had absolutely no knowledge of his involvement in the world of drugs, said the judge.

Mr Justice Collins added that the Independent Police Complaints Commission is now investigating the circumstances of Mr Ullah's death and the role played in the incident by four officers - DS Jason Liles, DC Richard Bazeley, PC Christopher Pomery and PC Howard Wynne.

In December last year, the IPCC investigating officer expressed the view that there was no evidence to justify any criminal proceedings against the officers.

Mr Ullah's grieving widow, Mussarat Habib, of Arborfield Close, Slough, today mounted a judicial review challenge to that decision, but Mr Justice Collins refused to intervene.

The judge said there could be no doubt the officers had been justified in stopping and searching Mr Ullah and in trying to make him spit out the package of crack cocaine in his mouth.

The officers involved had put in detailed, voluntary, witness statements after the incident and said they were in part motivated by fears for Mr Ullah's own safety if he swallowed the drugs.

He added that the central issue in the case is whether the officers "went too far" in restraining Mr Ullah and whether the force they used on him was "reasonable".

Although there was clearly a "causal link" between the incident and Mr Ullah's death, the judge observed that there was "ample material" to show that any criminal prosecution of the four officers would have little prospect of success.

One of the other occupants of the car had said that, in her view, one of the officers was "attempting to strangle Mr Ullah".

But the judge said her statement "painted generally a picture which did not accord with that given by the officers in their statements".

Henrietta Hill, for Mrs Habib, complained that the officers should have been fully cautioned before being interviewed by the IPCC and urged the judge that the investigation should now be re-started, leaving open the option of criminal prosecution of the officers involved.

However, dismissing the widow's challenge as "premature", the judge said it was the IPCC's role to carefully investigate what happened on the night Mr Ullah died.

Despite the investigating officer's view that criminal proceedings against the officers would not be justified, the judge emphasised that "the door is not closed" to that decision being reconsidered once the investigation is complete.

Urging the IPCC to keep Mr Ullah's family fully "in the picture" on the progress of the investigation, the judge also said that there would eventually be an inquest into the death and the possibility of the jury returning an "unlawful killing" verdict.

But he emphasised: "I don't for a moment suggest that that is something that will happen, or should happen".

Earlier the judge told the court that all four officers are insistent that the force they used on Mr Ullah was "consistent with what was reasonable in the circumstances".

He added: "They were entitled to use force, so long as it was reasonable force".

During the hearing, the judge commented on Mr Ullah's action in "very stupidly putting a bag of cocaine in his mouth and refusing to spit it out".

And he told the court: "That was stupid to say the least and may have been a contributory factor in his death".

Tim Storrie, representing the IPCC, told the judge that, despite the investigator's view that there was "no evidence" to justify criminal proceedings against the officers, the IPCC had not "closed its mind" to that possibility once the investigation is complete.

All four officers, he added, had been subjected to "probing" interviews by the IPCC and are adamant that they had done nothing wrong and were "attempting to assist" Mr Ullah.

The pathologist's report had also revealed that Mr Ullah suffered from an underlying heart problem and narrowing of the arteries that could have made him more susceptible to sudden death at times of stress.

Mrs Habib had her judicial review application dismissed.