SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 2254

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.B. Pattanik, Brijesh Kumar, JJ.
Rekha - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra and Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 348 of 2002(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 6841 of 2001)
Decided On : 11-03-2002

The subsequent framing of charges under a different section does not vitiate the investigation or the filing of the charge-sheet.

Headnote:

Section 155 - Criminal Procedure Code - Court held that the High Court was not justified in setting aside the entire proceeding on the conclusion that the charges framed under Section 323 IPC rendered the police incompetent to investigate the offence. The purpose of investigation is to collect evidence relating to the commission of the offence, and the subsequent framing of charges under a different section does not vitiate the investigation or the filing of the charge-sheet.

Fact of the Case:

The accused moved for quashing of the proceeding on the ground that the police officer cannot investigate without the order of a Magistrate having the power to try such case, as the charge was framed under a different section than initially alleged in the FIR.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court's decision to set aside the entire proceeding was not justified, and the subsequent framing of charges under a different section did not vitiate the investigation or the filing of the charge-sheet.

Issues: Whether the charges framed under a different section rendered the police incompetent to investigate the offence, and whether the subsequent framing of charges vitiated the investigation and the filing of the charge-sheet.

Ratio Decidendi: The purpose of investigation is to collect evidence relating to the commission of the offence, and the subsequent framing of charges under a different section does not vitiate the investigation or the filing of the charge-sheet.

Final Decision: The High Court's judgment was set aside, and the Magistrate was directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible.

ORDER :

G.B. Pattanik, Brijesh Kumar, JJ.

Leave granted.

2. The sole question that arises for consideration is, whether on account of infraction of sub-section (2) of Section 155 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) it would be competent for the High Court to quash the criminal proceeding including the filing of chargesheet and the recording of evidence ?

3. As it appears, on the basis of allegations made in the F.I.R. the investigating agency investigated into the same and filed a charge sheet under Sections 324 and 341 IPC. The Magistrate, however, while framing charge, being of the opinion that no case under Section 324 IPC has been made out, framed a charge under Section 323 IPC. The criminal proceeding continued and four witnesses have been examined in the meantime. The accused then moved for quashing of the proceeding on the ground that in respect of an offence under Section 323 IPC the police officer cannot investigate without ...2 2 the order of a Magistrate having the power to try such case and, as such, the very investigation is totally vitiated and consequently the filing of charge-sheet and any action taken thereunder by the Magistrate gets vitiated. The Magistrate as well as the Sessions Judge rejected the prayer of the accused. The High Court, by the impugned judgment, having quashed the charge-sheet as well as the subsequent proceeding, the complainant is in appeal to this Court.

4. M.Sanghi, learned counsel appearing for the complainant, contends that at the stage when the police investigated into the allegations made in the F.I.R. and filed a charge-sheet under Section 324 IPC, there was no infirmity with the same and, therefore, the subsequent framing of charge under Section 323 IPC would not vitiate the investigation in question. Lalit, learned counsel appearing for the accused, on the other hand, contended that in the case in hand the FIR does not disclose any cognizable offence or offence under Section 324 IPC and in such a case the mandatory requirement of sub-section (2) of Section 155 Cr.P.C. could not be flouted in the garb of filing a charge-sheet under Section 324 IPC and giving it a colour of existence of a cognizable offence and consequently the Court would be fully justified in interfering with the investigation made as well as the subsequent stage of the proceeding including the taking of cognizance and recording of evidence.

5. Having examined the provisions of Cr.P.C. including the provisions contained in sub-sections (2) and (4) of Section 155 as well as the host of provisions dealing with the question of irregularity in the matter of investigation, we are of the considered opinion that the High Court was not justified in setting aside the entire proceeding on a conclusion that the charges having been framed under Section 323 IPC, the police was incompetent to investigate into the offence and as such the very filing of charge-sheet and at every subsequent stages of the proceeding, is erroneous. The very purpose of investigation is to collect the evidence relating to commission of offence for establishing the accusation against the offender. In a matter like this, it would always be necessary for the Court to examine that if the accused in any way has been prejudiced by the steps taken by the investigating agency and further by the Court in proceeding with the matter. Neither we find any prejudice on the part of the accused nor are we in a position to hold that there was any infirmity with the investigation being conducted in the case in hand; particularly when the police submitted the charge-sheet under Sections 324 and 341 IPC. The subsequent order of the Magistrate framing charge under Section 323 IPC would not vitiate the investigation carried on nor the filing of the charge-sheet.

6. In the aforesaid premises, the impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside.

The Magistrate before whom the trial is pending, is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible.

The appeal stands

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top