Published on: 26 January 2023 at 11:34 IST
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: Vipul Shital Prasad Agarwal v. State of Gujarat (2013)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held the investigation agency can register a fresh First Information Report on the directions under aegis of Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for further investigation. It is held that fresh First Information Report on the basis of Section 173(8) CrPC does not mean that the previous Police Report is abandoned or rejected without specific orders of the Hon’ble Magistrate.
21. In my opinion, the mere undertaking of a further investigation either by the investigating officer on his own or upon the directions of the superior police officer or pursuant to a direction by the Magistrate concerned to whom the report is forwarded does not mean that the report submitted under Section 173(2) is abandoned or rejected.
It is only that either the investigating agency or the court concerned is not completely satisfied with the material collected by the investigating agency and is of the opinion that possibly some more material is required to be collected in order to sustain the allegations of the commission of the offence indicated in the report.
22. Therefore, the submission of Mr Sushil Kumar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, that the directions given by this Court earlier in Narmada Bai v. State of Gujarat [Narmada Bai v. State of Gujarat,] would necessarily mean that the charge-sheet submitted by the police stood implicitly rejected is without any basis in law and misconceived.
Even the fact that CBI purported to have registered a “fresh FIR”, in my opinion, does not lead to a conclusion in law that the earlier report or the material collected by Gujarat Police (CID) on the basis of which they filed the charge-sheet ceased to exist. It only demonstrates the administrative practice of CBI.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra