Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Magistrates Retain Powers to Order Further Investigation Post Charge Sheet Filing: Cal.HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark ruling, the High Court has upheld the powers of Magistrates to order further investigation even after the filing of a charge sheet. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble [Judge's Name], resolves the long-debated issue surrounding the scope of a Magistrate's supervisory jurisdiction in criminal cases and distinguishes between the stages of inquiry and trial.

The verdict was rendered in response to a Criminal Revision Application filed before the High Court, where the petitioner sought further investigation after the charge sheet was already filed. The Court extensively analyzed the constitutional mandate under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, emphasizing the need for fair and just investigations to ensure a smooth administration of justice.

Citing previous significant decisions by the Supreme Court, including Romila Thapar v. Union of India, the High Court stressed the importance of unbiased and meticulous investigations in criminal cases. It also referred to Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya v. The State of Gujarat, clarifying that the actual trial commences only after charges are framed, not upon taking cognizance.

The Court further clarified that the power to investigate is exclusively vested with police officers, and the High Court cannot appoint its own investigating agency unless there is a clear case of abuse of power or non-compliance with the legal provisions, as decided in Devendra Nath Singh v. State of Bihar & Ors.

The High Court held that the Magistrate's supervisory jurisdiction does not cease after charges are framed, and they retain the authority to order further investigation if it serves the interests of justice. Rejecting the petitioner's second plea for further investigation, the Court affirmed that all relevant materials were already on record, and the charge sheet and subsequent cognizance were in accordance with the law.

The Court cautioned against any unnecessary indulgence in such matters, as it would amount to an abuse of the legal process, thereby undermining the principles of justice.

This significant judgment not only resolves the ambiguity surrounding the Magistrate's powers but also reaffirms the importance of conducting a fair and impartial investigation for the proper administration of justice.

"The power to investigate must be exercised strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Code," the Court stated, underlining that Magistrates possess the discretion to order further investigation if it serves the purpose of justice.

The ruling has been hailed as a major step towards ensuring a fair and transparent criminal justice system, adhering to the principle of "Nemo debet esse judex in propria causa" - no one should be a judge in their own cause.

The High Court's decision sets a strong precedent for future cases and emphasizes the crucial role of Magistrates in overseeing the investigation process to ensure justice for all parties involved.

Date of Decision: 26.07.2023

Somnath Gupta vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Latest Legal News