Back
SAURABH LAVANIA
Vishal Tripathi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Saurabh Lavania, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the State and Sri Rakesh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2.
3. Present application has been filed by the applicant for quashing of impugned order dated 21.06.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar (in short "Trial Court") in S.S.T. No. 66 of 2024 (State vs. Vishal Tripathi and Others), whereby the Trial Court rejected the application seeking prayer to direct the Investigating Officer (I.O.) to conduct re-investigation/further investigation in the matter and the applicant has also sought the prayer to direct for re-investigation/further investigation.
4. Facts in brief are to the effect that the FIR No. 0228 of 2023 was lodged on 24.07.2023 at 13:15 Hours under Section 147, 323, 325, 427, 452 IPC by the informant-Pramod Tiwari against Devendra Tripathi, Vishal Tripahti, Rudra Tripathi, Aradhana Tripathi and Susheela. Column No. 3 of the FIR does not indicate date of the alleged incident.
5. Accord
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 Magistrate cannot treat a case as a complaint after taking cognizance based on a charge-sheet; further investigation rights lie with the police.
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 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....
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....
(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....
A Magistrate cannot order further investigation after charges are framed; this power exists only at the pre-cognizance stage to ensure a fair investigation.
The court emphasized the necessity of fair investigation in criminal proceedings and clarified the powers of the Magistrate to order further investigation under specific circumstances.
Further investigation – Police ought to follow procedure of seeking permission from Court to conduct “further investigation” and file supplementary chargesheet – Power to direct further investigation....
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
