Court’s Nod Not Required To Transfer Investigation To Another Police Station Even After Submission Of Chargesheet: Allahabad HC

The bench of Justice Umesh Chandra Sharma also said that even after the Court took cognizance of any offence, on the strength of the police report first submitted, it is open to the Police to conduct further investigation in a given case.

“There is nothing in Section 173 (8) to suggest that the Court is obliged to hear the accused before any such direction is made. The casting of any such obligation on Court would only result in encumbering it with the burden of searching for all potential accused to be afforded with the opportunity of being heard,” the Court further added.

With these observations, the Court rejected an application moved under Section 482 CrPC filed by the accused to quash the proceeding of a case under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452, 435, 504, and 506 IPC pending before a magistrate court in Deoria.

Essentially, it was the case of the accused that in this case, earlier the Station Officer of Police Station Bankata probed the matter, and submitted a chargesheet against 5 persons upon which the Magistrate took cognizance and issued process.

However, later on, an application was filed by the informant before SP Deoria for the transfer of the case from Police Station Bankata to Police Station Kotwali, Salempur (for the reasons that the probe was not conducted properly by Bankata PS) and the same was allowed and reinvestigation was ordered.

Thereafter, the SI of the PS Kotwali, Salempur reinvestigated the matter and submitted a chargesheet against eight persons, including the applicants, upon which the Magistrate took cognizance.

Aggrieved by this, the accused moved the HC contending that no permission was sought by the SP before transferring the investigation even when he was duty-bound to take permission.

Referring to the Apex Court’s judgement in the cases of Sri Bhagwan Samardha Sreepada Vallabha Venkata Vishwanandha Maharaj vs. State of AP 1999 and NP Jharia v. State of MP 2007, the Court noted that if there is a necessity for further investigation, the same can certainly be done as prescribed by Law and that even after the Court took cognizance of any offence, on strength of police report first submitted, it is open to Police to conduct further investigation.

The Court also observed that if cognizance has been taken by the Court and a defect in the investigation comes to light during the course of the trial, it may be cleared by further investigation, if circumstances so permit.

Consequently, on the basis of the above discussion, the Court was of the considered view that no formal permission of the concerned court was necessary for SP Deoria before transferring the investigation to another I.O of another Police Station.

Thus, the instant application was dismissed.

Appearances

Counsel for Applicant: Neeraj Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party: Government Advocate, KN Mishra, RK Shahi

Case title - Ram Komal and two others vs. State of U.P. and another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 348 [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12417 of 2005]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 348

Click Here To Read/Download Order