2007 (12) TMI 536 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of further investigation without prior permission of the Magistrate.
2. Legality of investigation conducted by a different investigating agency.
3. Applicability of precedents cited by the High Court.

Summary:

1. Validity of further investigation without prior permission of the Magistrate:
The Supreme Court clarified that "the law does not mandate taking of prior permission from the Magistrate for further investigation." It emphasized that "carrying out of a further investigation even after filing of the chargesheet is a statutory right of the police." The Court distinguished between "further investigation" and "re-investigation," noting that while re-investigation without prior permission is forbidden, further investigation is not.

2. Legality of investigation conducted by a different investigating agency:
The Court held that it is permissible for a higher authority to direct further investigation. It stated, "The CID is a part of the investigating authorities of the State," and "Section 36 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1972 empowers a police officer, superior in rank to an officer in charge of a police station, to exercise the same powers throughout the local area to which they are appointed." The Court found that the investigation was not conducted by a different agency but was a continuation by a superior authority within the same police framework.

3. Applicability of precedents cited by the High Court:
The Supreme Court found that the High Court's reliance on the cases of Ram Lal Narang v. State (Delhi Administration) and K. Chandrasekhar v. State of Kerala and Ors. was misplaced. The Court noted that in Ram Lal Narang, the issue was about two conspiracies and two investigations, while in K. Chandrasekhar, the issue was about the withdrawal of consent for investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation. The Supreme Court clarified that these cases did not apply to the present scenario where further investigation was directed by a superior police officer and not a fresh investigation.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court concluded that the judgment of the High Court could not be sustained and allowed the appeal. The Court also noted that the High Court did not address other contentions raised by the respondent regarding the validity of the chargesheet filed after the second investigation.