Accused Has No Right to Seek Further or Reinvestigation During Investigation Stage: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has emphasized that an accused has no right at the investigation stage, and does not have the right to seek further/reinvestigation of a case by filing a plea under Section 173(8) CrPC.

In that context, the Bench of Justice Saurabh Lavania observed that, "this Court has no hesitation to say that an accused has no right at the stage of investigation. Thus, the application under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. preferred by the accused, applicant herein, for re-investigation itself was not entertainable."

Vishal Tripathi filed a Section 482 CrPC plea challenging an order by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar, which had rejected his request for a re-investigation or further investigation into an FIR lodged against him. The FIR, dated July 24, 2023, accused Tripathi of assaulting the informant, the informant's son, and the informant's daughter, who is a minor. During the investigation, the Investigating Officer added charges under Section 354-B IPC and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act based on the minor's statement. Tripathi then applied for re-investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC, questioning the timing and circumstances of the incident, as well as the medical examination and FIR lodging dates. After the trial court rejected his plea, Tripathi approached the High Court, arguing that the Magistrate could still order a re-investigation even after the chargesheet had been filed. He claimed that the allegations in the FIR were false and inconsistent, warranting further investigation.

The High Court observed that the prayer for the re-investigation or further investigation was not liable to be acceded, for the following reasons:

(i) The Court has already observed regarding right of an accused at the stage of investigation, according to which, the accused has no right.

(ii) It appears that the I.O., after due investigation which includes collection of evidence, examination of various persons and reduction of statements into writing and thereafter considering the contents of the same including FIR, medical report(s) of injured(s) as also the statements of witnesses of fact, prepared the charge sheet and thereafter submitted it before the Court concerned.

(iii) The discrepancies related to date(s) and time, as indicated by the learned counsel for the applicant, would be considered by the trial Court at the stage of trial and the same are not required for seeking re-investigation/further investigation so far as the present case is concerned.

Accordingly, the application was dismissed.

Cause Title: Vishal Tripathi vs State Of U.P. (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC-LKO:54823)

Click here to read/download the Judgment