Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 42 (0.56 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 156 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Bhagwat Singh vs Commissioner Of Police And Anr on 25 April, 1985
In a way, in view of the three
options open to the Magistrate, after a report is
submitted by the police on completion of the
investigation, as has been amongst authoritatively
enumerated in Bhagwant Singh [Bhagwant Singh v.
Commr. of Police, (1985) 2 SCC 537 : 1985 SCC (Cri)
267] , the Magistrate, in both the contingencies,
14
namely; when he takes cognizance of the offence or
discharges the accused, would be committed to a
course, whereafter though the investigating agency
may for good reasons inform him and seek his
permission to conduct further investigation, he suo
motu cannot embark upon such a step or take that
initiative on the request or prayer made by the
complainant/informant. Not only such power to the
Magistrate to direct further investigation suo motu or
on the request or prayer of the
complainant/informant after cognizance is taken
and the accused person appears, pursuant to the
process, issued or is discharged is incompatible with
the statutory design and dispensation, it would even
otherwise render the provisions of Sections
311 and 319 CrPC, whereunder any witness can be
summoned by a court and a person can be issued
notice to stand trial at any stage, in a way
redundant. Axiomatically, thus the impugned
decision annulling the direction of the learned
Magistrate for further investigation is unexceptional
and does not merit any interference. Even otherwise
on facts, having regard to the progression of the
developments in the trial, and more particularly, the
delay on the part of the informant in making the
request for further investigation, it was otherwise
not entertainable as has been rightly held by the
High Court."