V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) IN this revision, the question that arises for consideration is, whether a criminal Court after taking cognizance of an offence and before any evidence is let in subsequent to such taking cognizance can proceed against any person by impleading him as an accused.

( 2 ) THE brief facts that gave rise to the question are : The de facto-complainant (Respondent No. 2) filed a report before the police making allegations against petitioners Nos. 1 to 3 and seeking their prosecution u/s. 420, IPC. The police, however, filed a charge-sheet arraying petitioner No. 1 alone as an accused. The Court below took cognizance of the offence against petitioner No. 1 alone. Thereafter, the Public Prosecutor filed a petition in the Court below to implead petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 as accused u/s. 190, Cr. P. C. , making certain allegations specifically against them. The important contents of the petition are that the FIR, and the statements of the witnesses given to the police recite clear overt acts against them and that the investigating officer did not give any reason for not charging these two petitioners. On this petition the Court made the order : "heard. Allowed the petition. " thus, the Court below impleaded petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 after taking cognizance of the offence and before any evidence is let-in thereafter. Hence this revision.

( 3 ) THE learned counsel, Sri Padmanabha Reddy, contended that after taking cognizance of an offence u/ S. 190, Cr. P. C. , the only stage available to a Criminal Court to implead any person as an accused is after letting in of some evidence, oral or documentary, during inquiry or trial as envisaged by S. 319, Cr. P. C. but not at any earlier point of time. The substance of the argument is that there is no power in the Court to implead any person as an accused in the absence of any evidence let-in during inquiry or trial as contemplated by S. 319 after crossing the stage under 190.

( 4 ) MR. M. N. Narasimba Reddy, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent contended that the Court has ample power to proceed against any person at any point of time since the amended S. 190, Cr. P. C. contemplates taking cognizance of any offence and not taking cognizance against a person or persons . On a perusal of the charge-sheet, S. 161, Cr. P. C. , statements and other material available on record, though the offence is taken cognizance of already against the accused, the Court can implead any person as an accused irrespective of the fact that the stage contemplated by S. 319, Cr. P. C. has arrived at or not.

( 5 ) THE learned Addl. Public Prosecutor made his independent submissions on lines similar to those advanced by Mr. Narasimha Reddy.

( 6 ) TO appreciate the respective contentions, it is pertinent to notice the general scheme of the Criminal Procedure Code in regard to matters concerning investigation, inquiry and trial.

( 7 ) CHAPTER XII of the Criminal Procedure Code deals with information to the police and their powers to investigate . Under that chapter whenever information of a crime is received by the police they have to register the same and investigate into the same independently if it is a cognizable offence and with the permission of the Magistrate if non-cognizable. After completion of the investigation, the police officer has to submit a report (either final report or charge-sheet) as contemplated by Sec. 173 (2), Cr. P. C. to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence. S. 173 (8), Cr. P. C. permits further investigation even after filing of the report u/ S. 173 (2) and submission of further report on the basis of the evidence obtained during the course of further investigation. Such a further report will receive treatment in terms of Ss. 173 (2) to 173 (6), Cr. P. C.

( 8 ) CHAPTER XIV deals with conditions requisite for initiation of proceedings . As per S. 190, Cr. P. C. , a Magistrate is empowered to take cognizance of any offence (a) on receipt of a compl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document