Cheque Bounce Cases Should Ordinarily Be Sent To Mediation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Calls For Mediation In NI Act Matters 138 NI Act | Belated Plea Of Forged Signatures Cannot Be Used To Delay Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses Handwriting Expert Sections 332 & 333 IPC | Lawful Discharge Of Duty Must Be Proved, Mere Status As Public Servant Not Enough: Allahabad High Court Bus Conductor Accused of Assaulting Traffic Inspectors Custody With Biological Mother Cannot Ordinarily Be Treated As Illegal Detention: Delhi High Court Refuses Habeas Corpus For Return Of Child To Canada Foreign Custody Orders Must Yield To Welfare Of Child: Delhi High Court Refuses To Enforce Canadian Return Order Through Habeas Corpus Possible Criminal Racket Luring Young Girls Through Self-Proclaimed Peers And Tantriks Must Be Examined: J&K High Court Orders Wider Judicial Scrutiny Nomenclature Cannot Determine Constitutional Entitlement: Supreme Court Strikes Down Exclusion Of ‘Academic Arrangement’ Employees From Regularisation Testimony Of Related Witnesses Cannot Be Discarded Merely For Relationship: Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction 149 IPC | Presence In Unlawful Assembly Is Enough For Murder Liability”: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Directly Recruited Engineers Entitled To Seniority From Date Of Initial Appointment Including Training Period: Supreme Court Section 32 Evidence Act | If There Is Even An Iota Of Suspicion, Dying Declaration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Framing A Case On Public Perceptions And Personal Predilections Ends Up In A Mess: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal In Alleged Parricide Arson Case When Oppression Petition Is Pending, Courts Must Ensure The Subject Matter Does Not Disappear Before Adjudication: Supreme Court Orders Status Quo In ₹1000 Crore Redevelopment Dispute Parties Cannot Participate In Arbitration And Later Challenge The Process Only After An Unfavourable Outcome : Supreme Court ICSID Clause Is Only A Fail-Safe Mechanism, Not A Restriction: Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Tribunal’s Constitution In MCGM Dispute Passive Euthanasia | 'Right To Die With Dignity Is An Intrinsic Facet Of Article 21': Supreme Court Permits Withdrawal Of Life Support Medical Board Must Record Reasons Before Denying Disability Pension To Armed Forces Personnel: Kerala High Court Grants Disability Pension To Air Force Corporal 138 NI Act | Directors Cannot Be Prosecuted If Company Is Not Made Accused: Allahabad High Court Quashes Cheque Bounce Cases Broad Daylight Removal of Goods by Known Creditors Is Not Theft: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Shopkeeper’s Insurance Claim Reservation Cannot Freeze Private Land Forever – Lapse Under Section 127 MRTP Act Operates Automatically: Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Transfer On Marriage Cannot Defeat Helper’s First Right To Promotion: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Anganwadi Helper’s Promotion Where Accusations Are Prima Facie True, Statutory Bar Under Section 43D(5) UAPA Operates; Bail Cannot Be Granted: Jharkhand High Court Bomb Hurled At Head Of Victim Shows Clear Intention To Kill: Kerala High Court Upholds Life Sentence In Kannur Political Murder Case Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment

Magistrate can order Further investigation after taking Cognizance - Orissa HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Orissa High Court has reaffirmed that just when an offence has been adjudicated, judicial magistrates still have the authority to compel further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

In Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya v. The State of Gujarat, a three-judge bench decision of the Supreme Court from 2019 was cited by a single judge bench led by Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar to clarify the legal position. After the Court overturned several earlier inconsistent rulings, it held,

Thus, it is evident that the Magistrate's authority under Section 156(3) of the CrPC is fairly broad. After all, it is this judicial authority that must be convinced that the police have conducted a legitimate inquiry. According to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, the Magistrate must have access to all necessary powers, including incidental or implied powers, in order to ensure that a "proper investigation"—defined as a fair and just investigation by the police—takes place. This, of course, includes the authority to order additional investigations after receiving a report under Section 173(2). In fact, even by text, the "investigation" mentioned in Section 156(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code would include all proceedings for the gathering of evidence carried out by a police officer, which would undoubtedly include proceedings by way of further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC. Thus, it is evident that the Magistrate's authority under Section 156(3) of the CrPC is fairly broad. After all, it is this judicial authority that must be convinced that the police have conducted a legitimate inquiry. According to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, the Magistrate must have access to all necessary powers, including incidental or implied powers, in order to ensure that a "proper investigation"—defined as a fair and just investigation by the police—takes place. This, of course, includes the authority to order additional investigations after receiving a report under Section 173(2). In fact, even by text, the "investigation" mentioned in Section 156(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code would include all proceedings for the gathering of evidence carried out by a police officer, which would undoubtedly include proceedings by way of further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC."

In light of this, the trial court's contested order is hereby reversed. The petitioner's request would be granted as a result of the current ruling, and the magistrate would provide the proper directives regarding further inquiry as per Section 173(8) Cr.P.C."

Manoj Kumar Agarwal vs State of Odisha

Latest Legal News