The Kerala High Court reaffirmed that further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC must be carried out by the same agency that conducted the original investigation, and cannot be lawfully entrusted to a different agency. The decision arose from a writ petition filed by an accused pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pathanamthitta. The accused faced allegations under Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 420 (cheating) and 354A (sexual harassment), and under Section 119(a) of the Kerala Police Act. The original investigation had been handled by the Station House Officer (SHO) of Pathanamthitta. After the final report was submitted, the de facto complainant applied for further investigation into the possibility that an offence under IPC Section 376 (rape) may have been committed. The Magistrate dismissed this application, but subsequently the Superintendent of Police transferred the further investigation to the Crime Branch — a different agency. The Crime Branch then submitted two supplementary reports dated 29 May 2017 and 29 June 2017.
Challenging these reports, the accused contended that the further investigation was illegal because it lacked Magistrate’s permission and was conducted by a different agency than the one that carried out the original probe. The Public Prosecutor defended the re-investigation on the basis that Section 173(8) CrPC allows the investigating agency to conduct further investigation, and argued that the statute confers an unfettered right in this regard. The Court, however, disagreed and anchored its decision on precedents, particularly relying on Peethambaran v State of Kerala and other authority. In doing so, the Court observed that in a similar vein the Supreme Court — in decisions like Atul Rao v State of Karnataka — has held that once charges are framed and a Court has taken cognizance, a Magistrate cannot order further investigation on his own, or at the behest of the complainant. The Court further noted that orders for fresh investigation or re-investigation by a different agency can only be issued by a superior court, not by a Magistrate.
On that basis, the High Court concluded that further investigation must remain with the same agency that carried out the original investigation. Accordingly, it allowed the writ petition, set aside the reports submitted by the Crime Branch, and directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to proceed with the trial (C.C. No. 28 of 2015), ignoring the impugned reports.
 CrPC Permissible Only by Agency Which Conducted Original Investigation: Kerala High Court){kind=link}
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.