Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Madhu Gulrajani – Appellant
Versus
State represented by Inspector of Police, W-8 AWPS, Thirumangalam, Chennai – Respondent
ORDER :
M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
1. This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 21.04.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.1617 of 2022 in Spl.S.C.No.31 of 2021 in Cr.No.20 of 2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai.
2. The petitioner/de-facto complainant, on whose complaint a case in Crime No.20 of 2020 registered by the first respondent against the second respondent and on completion of investigation, charge sheet filed in Spl.S.C.No.31 of 2021 for offence under Sections 342 , 376 AB of I.P.C. and Section 5 (m) r/w 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred as 'POCSO Act'). The second respondent/accused filed a petition under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. in Crl.M.P.No.1617 of 2022 seeking to order for further investigation. The trial Court by order dated 21.04.2023, allowed the same, against which, the present revision.
3. The contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that the trial Court ought not to have entertained the petition filed by the accused under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. seeking for further investigation, which is against law, which has been
Under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C., only the investigating agency can request further investigation after a charge sheet has been filed, not the accused. Failure to adhere to this principle leads to the....
The Magistrate cannot treat a case as a complaint after taking cognizance based on a charge-sheet; further investigation rights lie with the police.
The Magistrate cannot retroactively classify a case as a complaint after taking cognizance based on an investigation report, as further investigations are solely under the police's purview without re....
The court emphasized that further investigation must be justified by new evidence or deficiencies in the prior investigation, and the discretion to order it lies with the Magistrate based on case fac....
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 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....
Further investigation – Whether further investigation should or should not be ordered is within discretion of Magistrate who will exercise such discretion on facts of each case and in accordance with....
Further investigation without prior court permission is valid under Section 173(8) of CrPC, and such investigation does not violate the principle of double jeopardy under Article 20(2) of the Constit....
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
