Referring to the celebrated decision of the Apex Court in case of State of Haryana and Others verses Bhajan Lal and Others [(1992) Supp (1) SCC 335], the Orissa High Court reiterated that the scope and ambit of Section 482 CrPC covers a case where the allegations made in the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under section 156(1) of CrPC except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice G. Satapathy observed that “The order taking cognizance of offences cannot be questioned merely because the Police has not obtained formal permission to investigate, either by mistake or otherwise and on that score, the order taking cognizance of offence cannot be quashed, when the materials collected by the Investigating Agencies disclose the very ingredients of the offences, under which the cognizance is taken”.

Advocate K.A. Guru appeared for the Petitioner, whereas Advocate S.R. Roul appeared for the Respondent.

The brief facts of the case were that in 2009, the DSP, STF Bhubaneswar, lodged an FIR against nineteen accused persons and directed another DSP to investigate the case. Accordingly, other DSP submitted charge sheet against nine accused persons for commission of offence punishable under Sections 379/ 411/ 420/ 467/ 468/ 471/120(B)/34 of IPC read with Section 25/27 of Arms Act and Section 3/4/5 of Explosive Substance Act with Section 51 of OMMC Rule, 2016 by keeping the investigation open under Section 173(8) of CrPC for collection of further evidence. Later, the IO, placed the second charge sheet against twenty accused persons including the earlier nine by keeping investigation open. The petitioner therefore claimed that since no judicial order was passed for keeping the investigation open, the charge sheet against him was bad.

After considering the submission, the Bench found from a reading of Section 173(8) of CrPC that it would be desirable for the Police to inform the Court and seek formal permission to make further investigation.

However, the same being not mandatory, the Bench clarified that there cannot be any fetter to the power of Police to further investigate under Section 173(8) of CrPC.

Accordingly, the High Court held that the order taking cognizance of offence having not covered within the parameters as laid down by the Apex Court in case of Bhajan Lal, cannot be quashed in exercise of power under Section 482 of CrPC.

Cause Title: Babujan v. State of Orissa

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Orissa High CourtJustice G. Satapathy

Pankaj Bajpai