Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Ramdoss vs The Inspector Of Police And Others

Madras High Court|15 March, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petitioner has filed a petition under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. before the Court below seeking further investigation directing the first respondent to record Section 161 Cr.P.C. statements of the eye witness listed in the charge sheet and to file additional report.
2. The petitioner/defacto complainant filed a complaint before the respondent police and a case was registered and after investigation final report has been filed, and the matter was taken on file now the matter is pending for trial. At this stage, the petitioner/defacto complainant filed a petition under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. seeking further investigation. The trial Court dismissed the said petition holding that the petition filed under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. Challenging the said order of dismissal, the present civil revision case has been filed.
3. The issue involved in this matter is no longer res integra in view of the Full Bench Judgment of this court in Criminal Appeal No.663 of 2016, dated 23.02.2007, wherein, the Full Bench of this Court has held as follows:-
(vii) The power of grant permission for further investigation under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. after cognizance has been taken on the police report can be exercised by the Magistrate only on a request made by the investigating agency and not, at the instance of anyone other than the investigating agency or even suo moto.
4. In view of the Full Bench Judgment of this Court, the petitioner/defacto complainant is not entitled to seek for further investigation after charge sheet has been filed. Hence, I find no error in the order passed by the Court below and the criminal revision case deserves to be dismissed. However, it is always open to the petitioner to approach the trial Court for any relief if available to him under law.
15.03.2017 rrg 1.The Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Perambalur.
2.1. The Inspector of Police, Kunnam Police Station, Perambalur District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras-104.
V.BHARATHIDASAN.J rrg
Crl.R.C.No.610 of 2014
15.03.2017
http://www.judis.nic.in
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Ramdoss vs The Inspector Of Police And Others

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
15 March, 2017
Judges
  • V Bharathidasan