Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Saurabh Srivastava, J.
Jaypee Hospital – Appellant
Versus
State Of Up – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Saurabh Srivastava, J.
1. Heard Sri Rohan Gupta, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Deepak Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no. 4 and Sri Anand Sagar Dubey, learned AGA-I appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 3.
Prayer
2. Present petition has been preferred with the following prayers:-
"i) To pass an appropriate order or direction setting aside the order dated 17.05.2024, to the extent it contains directions to the Investigating Officer to reinvestigate into role of the petitioner, while granting bail to the accused in paragraph no. 14 of the anticipatory bail order, passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge-II/Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, District Court Gautam Buddha Nagar in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1696/2024, arising out of First Information Report dated 08.08.2023, registered as Case Crime No. 148 of 2023 under sections 304-A, 420, 468 and 201 IPC, PS-Sector 126, District: Commissionerate Gautam Budh Nagar.
ii) To pass an appropriate order or direction, restraining the Investigating Officer from conducting any further investigation or inquiry against the petitioner-hospital in pursuance of the impugned directions contained in paragraph no. 14 of the ant
The court clarified that a Magistrate cannot order re-investigation but may direct further investigation under specific circumstances, emphasizing the need for jurisdictional authority in such matter....
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....
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....
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.
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 affirmed that magistrates cannot order further investigations post-cognizance without evidence of malafide, upholding the legitimacy of the charge sheet filed under Section 498A.
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.
The court affirmed that thorough investigations were conducted, finding no deficiencies or evidence of foul play, thus denying the request for re-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
