Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal

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