Allahabad HC Pulls Up Dy. Commissioner Of Police For Directing Further Investigation In A Case Sans Magistrate's Nod, Seeks Explanation

A bench of Justice JJ Munir and Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal observed that after the Court takes cognizance of an offence, the Police can further investigate the matter; however, in view of Sub-Section (8) of Section 173 CrPC, the leave of the Magistrate is required in such cases.

The Court also clarified that the Police have no right to re-investigate the crime, investigate de novo, and submit a final report.

“The power to re-investigation is not available with the Police, including officer of all ranks, right from the investigating officer to the Director General of Police, as also the State Government. The power to direct a re-investigation vests only in this Court or the Supreme Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code or 226 of the Constitution,” the Court observed.

The Court made these observations while hearing a writ petition filed by one Navneet. Essentially, the matter pertained to a case under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, and 120B IPC in which the Police filed a charge sheet after an investigation before the Court in July 2018, upon which cognizance was taken by the concerned Magistrate.

The two accused challenged the charge sheet before the High Court; however, the case was dismissed on March 7, 2024, upholding the charge sheet and the order of cognizance.

Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central NOIDA, Gautambudh Nagar, passed an order on April 4, 2024, directing further investigation into the case.

The case was assigned to a nominated Inspector of Police, Radha Raman Singh, Incharge Crime Branch, Gautambudh Nagar, who investigated the matter virtually de novo and submitted a final report on May 06, 2024, exculpating all the accused.

Challenging the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Police as well as the further investigation taken up by the Inspector Of Police, the petitioner moved the Court contending that there was absolutely no jurisdiction with the Police to investigate the matter de novo under the garb of carrying out further investigation and put in a final report exculpating the accused, in supersession of the earlier report, charge sheeting them.

It was further argued that a final report submitted after the Court has taken cognizance of the offence is of no consequence and is not a report that the Magistrate could accept based on which the proceeding of the criminal case can be dropped to put an end to the case before the Magistrate.

It was also apprised to the Court that the investigating officer had issued a notice under Section 91/160 CrPC to the petitioner to come forward to the Police Station and produce evidence.

Admitting the case, the Court issued notice to the State of UP, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, and the investigating officer and granted them 3 weeks' time to file their counter.

The Court also sought a personal affidavit of the Deputy Commissioner of Police explaining why he thought he could direct further investigation without obtaining leave of the learned Magistrate under Section 173(8) of the Code.

Further, the Investigating officer has been directed to furnish an explanation as to how, under the garb of further investigation, he could do a re-investigation or investigation de novo and put in a final report in the matter, where the Police earlier had filed a charge sheet, which this Court had approved by our order passed in Application U/S 482 CrPC No.2667 of 2019.

The matter will now be heard on July 9. Meanwhile, the Court has stayed the notice issued to the petitioner under Section 91/160 of CrPC.