If Closure Report Is Filed, Magistrate Can't Direct Police To File Chargesheet : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that upon receipt of a closure report from the police, a Magistrate cannot direct the investigating agency to file a charge-sheet against its opinion. The Court reiterated that the formation of opinion as to whether a case for trial is made out lies exclusively with the Investigating Officer. While the Magistrate retains the discretion to accept the report, reject it and take cognizance, or order further investigation, it cannot direct the police to file a charge sheet.“…the formation of opinion as to whether or not there is a case to place the accused on trial is exclusively with the officer in charge of the investigation. If a closure report is filed; finding no case made out, it is not open to the Magistrate to direct the police to file a charge sheet", observed the bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K Vinod Chandran.The court said that the Magistrate is empowered to take cognisance even on a closure report."If the Magistrate agrees with the report that there was no case made out for issuing process to the accused, he might accept the report and close the proceedings. If he came to the conclusion that further investigation was necessary he might make an order to that effect under Section 156(3). If ultimately the Magistrate was of the opinion that the facts set out in the police report constituted an offence he could take cognizance of the offence, notwithstanding the contrary opinion of the police expressed in the report."Committal order not determinative of whether trial should be joint or separateThe Court also held that committal orders do not determine whether the trial should be single, separate or joint, which remains within the Court's discretion under the CrPC, provided no prejudice is caused to the accused."A committal order just gives the Sessions Court cognizance over the trial of the persons committed and is not the basis of the cognizance taken for trial”, the Court said, adding that “if there is no prejudice to the accused, multiple committal orders can be consolidated to try the accused at one trial, provided it is justified under Sections 233 to 239 of the CrPC”.The Bench observed that “the above discussion makes it crystal clear that the opinion in the final report filed is not decisive of the cognizance and the committal order/s is/are not determinative of whether the trial is single/separate/joint; which is at the exclusive discretion of the Court.”The Court examined the legal position while dealing with an unusual procedural history in the case, in which a man who spent nearly 26 years facing prosecution in a dowry death case. The first investigating officer had found material against all 17 persons named in the FIR but, acting on the directions of the Superintendent of Police, filed a chargesheet only against the father-in-law and mother-in-law while continuing the investigation against the remaining 15 accused. A second investigating officer later filed a final report stating that no evidence had been found against the remaining accused.Holding that the Superintendent of Police had acted without authority in directing that the chargesheet be restricted to only two accused despite the investigating officer finding a case against all 17, the Bench emphasised that the opinion on whether an accused should be put on trial rests exclusively with the investigating officer. The Court added that if further investigation was considered necessary, it should ideally have been undertaken under the orders of the court after the first report was submitted.Referring to the settled legal position laid down in Abhinandan Jha v. Dinesh Mishra, H.S. Bains v. State (UT of Chandigarh), Ram Naresh Prasad v. State of Jharkhand and Ramswaroop Soni v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Bench held that when the police submit a closure report, a Magistrate has three options: accept the report and close the proceedings, take cognizance of the offence on the basis of the materials collected during the investigation, or direct further investigation. However, the Magistrate cannot compel the investigating agency to file a chargesheet contrary to its opinion.At the same time, the Court underscored that the Magistrate is not bound by the police's opinion. Even if the investigating agency concludes that no offence is made out, the Magistrate may independently examine the materials in the police report and take cognizance under Section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or order further investigation. The Bench described this as reflecting the "primacy of the Court" in the process of taking cognizance.Applying these principles, the Supreme Court held that although there had been procedural irregularities in the manner the investigation was conducted, the Magistrate's cognizance of the subsequent report could not be faulted because the first report, which was also before the court, had found the offences made out against all the accused. The Court ultimately acquitted the appellant ...

If Closure Report Is Filed, Magistrate Can't Direct Police To File Chargesheet : Supreme Court

Yash Mittal

The Court observed that the Magistrate has the option of taking cognizance on a closure report.

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Yash Mittal

If Closure Report Is Filed, Magistrate Can't Direct Police To File Chargesheet : Supreme Court

Yash Mittal

The Court observed that the Magistrate has the option of taking cognizance on a closure report.

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Yash Mittal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers