Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Sandeep Sunil Kumar Lohariya, son of the deceased, filed a criminal revision application before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated 05.05.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Thane. The Sessions Judge had dismissed an application under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) filed by the prosecution in Sessions Case No.281 of 2013. The brief facts are that the applicant's father was murdered, and the police initially investigated and filed a charge-sheet. Subsequently, the applicant filed a complaint alleging that certain other persons were involved in the murder, and the prosecution sought further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC. The Sessions Court dismissed the application, leading to the revision. The High Court heard the matter with consent of counsel. The court observed that the Sessions Court had not properly considered the scope of Section 173(8) CrPC, which allows further investigation even after charge-sheet if new material emerges. The High Court held that the impugned order was perverse and set it aside, directing the Sessions Court to reconsider the application afresh in accordance with law. The revision was allowed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Further Investigation - Section 173(8) CrPC - The court has power to order further investigation even after charge-sheet is filed, if new material comes to light. The Sessions Court erred in dismissing the application without considering the need for further investigation based on the applicant's complaint. (Paras 1-10)
B) Criminal Revision - Interference with Discretionary Order - The High Court in revision can interfere if the order is perverse or suffers from legal infirmity. The impugned order was set aside as it failed to apply correct legal principles. (Paras 11-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Sessions Court erred in dismissing the application under Section 173(8) CrPC for further investigation in a murder case, and whether the High Court should interfere in revision.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the criminal revision application, set aside the impugned order dated 05.05.2021, and directed the Sessions Court to reconsider the application under Section 173(8) CrPC afresh in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Section 173(8) CrPC
- further investigation
- power of court to order further investigation
- scope of revision
- interference with discretionary order
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (08) 85
Criminal Revision Application No.140 of 2021
Mr. Ameya Lambhate for the Applicant, Mrs. A.S.Pai, Spl. P.P. for the State, Mr. Aditya Sharma a/w. Archana Shukla i/b. Sudha Dwivedi for Respondent Nos.6 and 7, Sr. Adv. Aabad Ponda i/b. Vinod R. Gupta for Respondent Nos.10 and 11
Sandeep Sunil Kumar Lohariya
State of Maharashtra and Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision application challenging dismissal of application under Section 173(8) CrPC for further investigation in a murder case.
Remedy Sought
The applicant sought setting aside of the order dated 05.05.2021 passed by the Sessions Judge, Thane, dismissing the application for further investigation, and sought direction for further investigation.
Filing Reason
The applicant, son of the deceased, alleged that the investigation was incomplete and that other persons were involved in the murder, and the prosecution's application for further investigation was wrongly dismissed.
Previous Decisions
The Sessions Judge, Thane, by order dated 05.05.2021, dismissed the application under Section 173(8) CrPC filed by the prosecution in Sessions Case No.281 of 2013.
Issues
Whether the Sessions Court erred in dismissing the application under Section 173(8) CrPC for further investigation.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the discretionary order of the Sessions Court in revision.
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant argued that the Sessions Court failed to consider the scope of Section 173(8) CrPC and the new material that warranted further investigation.
The respondents opposed the revision, supporting the Sessions Court's order.
Ratio Decidendi
The court has power under Section 173(8) CrPC to order further investigation even after charge-sheet is filed if new material comes to light. The Sessions Court's dismissal of the application without considering the scope of the provision and the new material was perverse and liable to be set aside.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties.
This criminal revision application is filed by the son of the deceased challenging order dated 05.05.2021 whereby the learned Sessions Judge, Thane, dismissed the application under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. filed by the prosecution in Sessions Case No.281 of 2013.
Procedural History
The applicant's father was murdered. Police investigated and filed charge-sheet. Applicant filed complaint alleging involvement of others. Prosecution filed application under Section 173(8) CrPC for further investigation. Sessions Court dismissed application on 05.05.2021. Applicant filed criminal revision before High Court on 31.08.2023.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 173(8)
