Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court has held that a magistrate’s court has the power to intervene in a pending investigation and also to direct the police to add more sections of offences in an FIR against the accused and investigate a private complaint.
Justice U. Durga Prasad Rao was dismissing a criminal revision petition moved by Mr Aknuri Kankaraj and other office-bearers of Telangana Boggu Ghani Karmika Sangham and employees of Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Kothagudem.
They had challenged an order passed by the first additional judicial magistrate of Kothagudem, directing the police to add IPC Sections 409 and 477 (A) to a pending case on a private complaint against them.
Some members of the Sangham had moved a private complaint against the office bearers before the magistrate for their alleged involvement in misappropriation of funds. The magistrate had directed the police to register a case against the accused under IPC Sections 420, (cheating) 406 r/w 34 and 120B.
While the investigation was pending, the complainants moved another miscellaneous petition before the magistrate court urging it to add Section 409 (criminal breach of trust by public servant) and 477 (A) (falsification of accounts), against the accused.
The petitioners contended that once the court had forwarded the complaint to the police under Section 156(3) CrPC for registration of FIR and investigation, it would be the prerogative of the police to conduct the investigation and either file a chargesheet or refer the report. During the course of investigation, judicial intervention was unwarranted and impermissible under law, they contended.
Citing SC judgments, Justice Durga Prasad said that the apex court had stated that a magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC had the power to monitor investigation to ensure that it was properly done.
The judge said, "In my considered view, by this order, he has not committed any overreach and made an impermissible penetration into the domain of investigation.
The prerogative of the police to investigate has been kept intact, but they were only asked to investigate whether the accused have in fact committed the offences under the newly added sections including the ones that are already referred. So, the act of the magistrate cannot be found fault with.”
