Section 173(8) CrPC Gives Unfettered Right To Investigating Agency For 'Further' Probe, No Restrictions Exist: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has said Section 173(8) CrPC gives an "unfettered right" to the investigation agency for further investigation "with no conditions" and it cannot be restricted since such restrictions do not exist in the statute.

"The Statute does not limit the right to investigate under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. only till the trial begun," said Justice Yogesh Khanna.

Section 173(8) of the Code states that further investigation can be done in respect of an offence wherein a police report or chargesheet has been forwarded to the Magistrate.

Justice Khanna said it is not mandatory to take prior permission from the Magistrate for 'further' investigation even after the filing of the charge sheet as it is the statutory right of the police. The material collected in further investigation cannot be rejected merely because it has been filed at the stage of trial, said the court. 

The bench made the observations while dealing with a plea moved by an accused Sri Desaraju Venugopal, challenging an order passed by trial court. The main grievance in the petition before the court was that the Special Judge has listed the case for hearing on framing of charges "without there being an end to an investigation". 

The FIR was registered by CBI in 2015 and chargesheet was filed in June 2016 but investigation is still continuing in the case with the agency saying that it will soon file another supplementary chargesheet in the case, the court was told. It was argued that the probe cannot be carried on endlessly and it needs to stop once the trial begins. 

The court noted that Venugopal has already been chargesheeted and a supplementary chargesheet has also been filed against him. It added that investigation is now left only qua two co-accused who are living in the US

"Though the supplementary chargesheet says certain letters were written to US Authorities but during arguments it appears the investigating agency itself is doubting the possibility of getting answers to its queries made to foreign authorities, hence it would not be appropriate to stall the trial only on this ground," the court said.

The court reiterated that though there is no bar for the investigating agency to further investigate the matter, it would only be when some fresh evidence would come to its fore.

"Such fresh evidence would not come if the agency is sitting idle. For it the respondent shall have to make efforts, like in present case it has written letters to its foreign counterparts. Such evidence may come or not, one cannot predict at this moment, hence in case any fresh evidence is found which may be used against the petitioner it would certainly then be incumbent upon the respondent to inform the learned Special Judge and to seek its permission to further investigate the matter against petitioner. Such right admittedly can be exercised by it even after trial begins," it added.

Justice Khanna said that if any fresh or new material is found by the CBI against Venugopal, it shall bring it to the notice of the special judge to seek permission to further investigate, if necessary.

"The learned Trial Court would then decide the matter in accordance with law. However, presently since no fresh evidence is forthcoming and the respondent being only seeking queries, which may or may not come, and such queries being predominantly qua co-accused person, the petitioner cannot be allowed to stall the proceedings," the court ordered.

Title: SRI DESARAJU VENUGOPAL v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 1156

Click Here To Read Order