Magistrate Or Special Court Has No Power U/S 156(3) CrPC To Order Further Investigation By Different Investigating Agency: Karnataka HC
The Karnataka High Court observed that the magistrate or special Court has no power under Section 156(3) CrPC to order further investigation by different investigating agency.
The Court said that the power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be exercised by the trial Court.
The Court was hearing a Criminal Appeal by the State that called into question an order that directed further investigation to be conducted by the Crime Investigation Department which was not the Investigating Agency that had earlier conducted the investigation.
The bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna observed, “The power of the concerned Court is restricted only to order further investigation by the same investigating agency and not at the hands of the different investigating agency.”
Additional SPP Jagadeesha B.N. appeared for the Appellant and Senior Advocate Murthy D. Nail appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
A crime was registered for offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w. 34 of the IPC on an incident that happened on the same day. The police file a charge sheet before the concerned Court after the completion of the investigation for the aforesaid offences. After filing the charge sheet, the mother of the deceased filed an application under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. seeking further investigation to be done in the case. While the application was sought only for further investigation, the concerned Court allowed the application by directing the investigation to be conducted by a different Investigating Agency. Aggrieved by the said order, the State approached the High Court with the current petition.
The Court said that directing further investigation by allowing the application for a report to be filed under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. could not have been directed to a different investigating agency.
“It is too well settled principle of law that a power to order investigation, reinvestigation or further investigation is only with the hands of this Court.”, the Court said.
The Court mentioned the decision in Chandra Babu v. State reported in (2015) 8 SCC 774, “As we have already indicated, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has basically directed for further investigation. The said part of the order cannot be found fault with, but an eloquent one, he could not have directed another investigating agency to investigate as that would not be within the sphere of further investigation and, in any case, he does not have the jurisdiction to direct reinvestigation by another agency. Therefore, that part of the order deserves to be lancinated and accordingly it is directed that the investigating agency that had investigated shall carry on the further investigation and such investigation shall be supervised by the Superintendent of Police concerned. After the further investigation, the report shall be submitted before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate who shall deal with the same in accordance with law.”
Accordingly, the Court quashed the impugned order.
Finally, the Court allowed the Criminal Petition.