Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
NAMRATH NITHYANANDA SHETTY – Appellant
Versus
THE SR. POLICE INSPECTOR AND ANR. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(MILIND N. JADHAV, J.)
1. Heard Mr. Ramrakhiani, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr. Gor, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 4 and Ms. Krishnaiyer, learned APP for the State.
2. After hearing the parties on 28.11.2024, this Court passed the following order.:-
“1. Heard Mr. Ramrakhiani, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr. Gor, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 4 and Ms.Krishnaiyer, learned APP for the State.
2. In view of the issue involved in the present Criminal Revision Application (for short “CRA”), it needs to be heard finally so that appropriate order can be passed.
3. Briefly stated, Revision Applicant is aggrieved with the impugned order dated 02.08.2023, inter alia, dismissing his complaint under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) by the learned JMFC, Pune.
4. The principal ground to challenge the order is with reference to a specific direction contained in the previous order dated 29.06.2022 passed by the same Court, however, by the predecessor JMFC. This order is appended at Exhibit “C” – page No.32 of the CRA. By virtue of this order, directions were given to the Investigating Officer (IO) by the Court to carry ou
The court emphasized the necessity for Investigating Officers to comply with judicial orders for further investigation, highlighting the importance of timely justice and the rights of complainants.
Point of Law : Since such a direction takes away the power of the sanctioning authority to take an independent position after applying, its mind upon the material and evidence collected as to whether....
The complainant's right to seek further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, should not be misused by filing repeated applications without fresh material, and t....
(1) Further investigation cannot be permitted to do a fishing and roving enquiry when police had already filed charge-sheet – There must be some reasonable basis which should trigger application for ....
The accused do not possess the right to request further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C., as this power is reserved for the investigating agency and the court, ensuring that the inve....
(1) Further investigation – Mere fact that there may be further delay in concluding trial should not stand in way of further investigation if that would help court in arriving at truth and do real an....
The accused has no right to seek further investigation after a charge sheet is filed, and discrepancies in evidence are to be resolved at trial.
The requirement of notice before condonation of delay in filing a report is essential to ensure fair procedure as mandated by the principles of natural justice.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
