Section 173(8) CrPC: Not Necessary To Review Or Recall Order Accepting Closure Report Prior To Carrying Out Further Investigation- SC

A Supreme Court Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice JB Pardiwala has held that "prior to carrying out a further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC, it is not necessary for the Magistrate to review or recall the order accepting the final report".

ASG Jayant K Sud appeared for CBI before the Court.

In this case, the High Court had quashed the full proceedings of the CBI against the accused on the ground that the CBI could not have undertaken further investigation Section 173(8) of the CrPC.

The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court was right in taking the view that the Special Court could not have taken cognizance upon the chargesheet filed by the CBI based on further investigation, having once already filed a closure report in the past and the same having been accepted by the court concerned at the relevant point of time.

On analyzing several decisions of the Court rendered in cases where final reports (closure reports) had already been submitted and accepted, the Apex Court concluded that "there is no bar against conducting further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC after the final report submitted under Section 173(2) of the CrPC has been accepted. It is also evident, that prior to carrying out a further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC, it is not necessary for the Magistrate to review or recall the order accepting the final report".

Thereafter, the Court summarised its findings in the following manner:

(i) Even after the final report is laid before the Magistrate and is accepted, it is permissible for the investigating agency to carry out further investigation in the case. In other words, there is no bar against conducting further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC after the final report submitted under Section 173(2) of the CrPC has been accepted.

(ii) Prior to carrying out further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC it is not necessary that the order accepting the final report should be reviewed, recalled or quashed.

(iii) Further investigation is merely a continuation of the earlier investigation, hence it cannot be said that the accused are being subjected to investigation twice over. Moreover, investigation cannot be put at par with prosecution and punishment so as to fall within the ambit of Clause (2) of Article 20 of the Constitution. The principle of double jeopardy would, therefore, not be applicable to further investigation.

(iv) There is nothing in the CrPC to suggest that the court is obliged to hear the accused while considering an application for further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC.

Subsequently, the Court allowed the appeals and set aside the order passed by the High Court.

Cause Title: State Through Central Bureau Of Investigation v. Hemendhra Reddy & Anr. Etc.

Click here to read/download the Judgment