In Athul Rao Vs. State of Karnataka, the question before the Supreme Court of India was whether, after framing of charges and taking cognizance, it is open to the Magistrate to direct further investigation either suo motu or on an application filed by the complainant/informant?
The Court referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Amrutbhai Shambhubhai Patel Vs. Sumanbhai Kantibhai Patel and others, (2017) 4 where after analysing earlier decisions on the point, it has been held that neither the Magistrate suo motu nor on an application filed by the complainant/informant can direct further investigation. Further investigation in a given case may be ordered only on the request of the investigating agency and that too, in circumstances warranting further investigation on the detection of material evidence only to secure fair investigation and trial, the life purpose of the adjudication in hand.
The Court referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Amrutbhai Shambhubhai Patel Vs. Sumanbhai Kantibhai Patel and others, (2017) 4 where after analysing earlier decisions on the point, it has been held that neither the Magistrate suo motu nor on an application filed by the complainant/informant can direct further investigation. Further investigation in a given case may be ordered only on the request of the investigating agency and that too, in circumstances warranting further investigation on the detection of material evidence only to secure fair investigation and trial, the life purpose of the adjudication in hand.
Comments
Post a Comment