The court clarified that ongoing investigations must follow the Criminal Procedure Code if initiated before the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita's enforcement, affirming procedural adherence to established legal norms.

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are at the doors of this Court, yet again calling in question an order passed by the concerned Court directing re/further investigation under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and submit a report by 23.05.2025.

2. Heard Sri.C.V.Nagesh, learned Senior Counsel for Sri.Raghavendra K., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri.B.N.Jagadeesha, Addl. SPP along with Sri.Chamappa Erappa, learned HCGP for respondent No.1, Sri.Bhargav K.S., learned counsel for respondent No.2.

3. The petitioner No.1 is the mother of petitioner No.2 and the complainant. Therefore, the rift is between the members of the family. A private complaint comes to be registered invoking Section 200 of the Cr.P.C . against the accused for offences punishable under Sections 416, 419, 420, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The matter was referred to investigation which then becomes a crime in Crime No.157/2024. This is called in question by the petitioners herein before this Court in Criminal Petition No.5891/2024 on the score that the order of reference under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C . suffered from non-application of mind. This Court on hearing the parties, set-aside the order of reference of the concerned Court under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C . and remitted the matter back to the hands of the concerned Court to pass necessary orders, in accordance with law. The result of remittance is the fulcrum of the challenge in the subject petition.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that the concerned Court committed a procedural illegality in referring the matter for re/further investigation under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C ., and while incorporating Section 175 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , the Court appears to have got itself confused as to what should be followed, BNSS or Cr.P.C . He would contend that the order directing re-investigation can only be the power of the Constitutional Courts and not the learned Magistrate and for a further investigation which power is available to the concerned Court, it is only after the submission of a report. On these scores, the learned Senior Counsel would seek quashment of the proceedings including the FIR so registered.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Complainant would contend that the power to direct further investigation is available to the concerned Court even without submission of a report under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C .. He would contend that the concerned Court has recorded the Sworn Statement of the complainant and passed necessary orders which cannot be said to be suffering from procedural illegality. He would seek dismissal of the petition.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the State would also toe the lines of the learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material on record.

8. In-furtherance whereof, the issues that falls for consideration is:

(1) For a complaint that is registered prior to 01.07.2024 i.e., the date on which the BNSS comes into force, the procedure followed earlier should be continued under Cr.P.C . or under BNSS ?

(2) Whether the order of the concerned Court directing re/further investigation under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C . is tenable in law or otherwise ?

9. Issue No.1:

For a complaint that is registe