Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.173(8) –Further Investigation – Transfer of Investigation to CBI –Appellant shared a viral picture of then Cabinet Minister on facebook–As per him, appellant was forcibly took from his residence by police officers and beaten up and threatened by the police – FIR lodged by appellant, however, name of the Cabinet Minister not named in FIR – Writ Petition was filed in the High Court seeking transfer of investigation to CBI or to any other agency–During the pendency of the writ petition, the trial Court framed the charges against the accused on the basis of the chargesheets filed –The High Court refused to transfer the investigation –High Court while dismissing the petition observed that once the charges have been framed by the Magistrate/Trial Court and therefore, it can be said that the trial has begun and therefore, thereafter, re- investigation/further investigation is not permissible– On appeal, held : Investigation may be transferred to the CBI only in “rare and exceptional cases” –High Court has not committed any error in refusing to transfer the investigation to CBI –The real investigation started only after the intervention of the High Court and after passing various orders in the present proceedings by the High Court – Even according to the State investigating agency, still the further investigation is required on certain aspects – The victim has a fundamental right of fair investigation and fair trial –Therefore, mere filing of the chargesheet and framing of the charges cannot be an impediment in ordering further investigation / re-investigation / de novo investigation, if the facts so warrant – No proper investigation by the State investigating agency at the relevant time and even the material evidences were also not collected – High Court has committed a very serious error in not ordering and/or permitting the State police agency to further investigate into the FIR.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD :1.Bearing in mind the position of law, in the facts, and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the High Court has not committed any error in refusing to transfer the investigation to CBI. Even the appellant has not vehemently pressed such a prayer. The Court is in complete agreement with the view taken by the High Court insofar as refusing to transfer the investigation to CBI is concerned. Applying the law laid down by this Court in the case of Dharam Pal and Bharati Tamang and to do the complete justice and in furtherance of fair investigation and fair trial, the constitutional courts may order further investigation / re-investigation / de novo investigation even after the charge sheet is filed and the charges are framed.[Paras 7.4 and 11][70-E-F; 75-D]
3. It is required to be noted that in the present case, the allegations in the FIR, right from very beginning, were against the accused No. 13, who at the relevant time was the sitting Cabinet Minister occupying the high position. Even at the relevant time, when the State Police investigated the FIR bearing No. 120 of 2020, in the first chargesheet and the second chargesheet did not name the accused No. 13. Even the investigation was also conducted in a perfunctory manner. The real investigation started only after the intervention of the High Court and after passing various orders in the present proceedings by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR were very serious including the misuse of powers by the sitting Cabinet Minister and of abducting, kidnapping and beating the complainant.[Para 12.1][75-G-H; 76-A-B]
4. Be that as it may,even according to the State investigating agency, the further investigation is required. As observed and held by this Court in its various decisions, the victim has a fundamental right of fair investigation and fair trial. Therefore, mere filing of the chargesheet and framing of the charges cannot be an impediment in ordering further investigation / reinvestigation / de novo investigation, if the facts so warrant. [Para 12.3][77-B]
5. The endeavour of the Court should be to have the fair investigation and fair trial only. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case narrated hereinabove, this Court is of the opinion that a case is made out for further investigation and the State agency may be permitted to conduct a further investigation and to bring on record the further material, which may be in the furtherance of fair investigation and fair trial. The High Court has committed a very serious error in not ordering and/or permitting the State police agency to further investigate into the FIR bearing Nos. 119 and 120 of 2020. The High Court has not considered the relevant aspects narrated hereinabove and therefore interference of this Court is warranted. [Para 13][77E-G] Himanshu Kumar and Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors., 2022 SCC Online SC 884; Bharati Tamang Vs. Union of India and Ors., (2013) 15 SCC 578:[2013]
14 SCR 525; Dharam Pal Vs. State of Haryana and Ors., (2016) 4 SCC 160 : [2016] 1 SCR 194 – relied on.
Babubhai Vs. State of Gujarat, (2010) 12 SCC 254 : [2010] 10 SCR 651; Ram Jethmalani Vs. Union of India (2011) 8 SCC 1 : [2011] 8 SCR 725; Vinubhai Haribhai Malviya and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and Anr., (2019)
17 SCC 1 : [2019] 15 SCR 936; Rama Chaudhary Vs. State of Bihar, (2009) 6 SCC 346 : [2009] 5 SCR 482– referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.