Ahmad Ullah vs Crime Branch of Criminal Investigation Deptt. (C.B., C.I.D.) and Another

Rajeshwar Singh, J.—One case was pending in Sessions Court. C. I. D. applied for further investigation. The Sessions Court permitted it. Against that order the complainant has filed this revision. It was heard in the morning and I said that order will be passed day after to-morrow but then it was fixed for further hearing after lunch to-day so that the position may be made clear, but the parties have not appeared to make further submissions. Hence I proceed to dictate the order just now.

The relevant provision pointed out in this connection by the learned Counsel for the applicant is Section 173(8) Code of Criminal Procedure which runs as under:

Nothing in this section shall be deemed to preclude further investigation in respect of an offence after a report under Sub-section (2) has been forwarded to the Magistrate and, whereupon such investigation, the officer in charge of the police station obtains further evidence, oral or documentary, he shall forward to the Magistrate a further report or reports regarding such evidence in the form prescribed; and the provisions of Sub-sections (2) to (6) shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to such report or reports as they apply in relation to a report forwarded under Sub-section (2).

This section says that the investigating agency has a right to make further investigation even after a report has been forwarded to the Magistrate u/s 173 Code of Criminal Procedure . It does not say that this right comes to an end after the case is committed to Session. It merely clauses the point of time whereafter the right does not cease. So from it one cannot infer that when the case has been committed to the Sessions Court the investigating agency ceases to have a right to investigate further.

The latter portion of this section provides that after further investigation the investigating agency shall forward the report to the Magistrate as it does after the initial investigation. But this does not mean that after committal to the Court of Sessions the right of investigating agency ceases to investigate further. It says that the report shall be sent to the Magistrate because the Legislature did not want to by-pass the Magistrate. When a report is sent to the Magistrate it is for him and the Sessions Court to consider as to what use they want to make of it. It can be argued as to why the investigating agency asked for permission of the Sessions Court. It probably did in order to ensure that nothing happens in the nature of contempt of court and no trouble is created unintentionally.

The only point argued before me was that when the case is committed to the Court of Session the right of the investigating agency under Sub-section (8) of Section 173 comes to an end. This argument is not accepted in view of what has been said earlier and no other point was argued.

So this application, whether it is treated to be revision or it is treated as an application u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure , merits dismissal and it is dismissed.