SREEKUMAR MENON Vs. BABY CONTAINER PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have approached this Court challenging the re-investigation/further investigation ordered by the learned Magistrate. Originally the first respondent herein filed a complaint against these petitioners alleging commission of offences under Secs.120B, 405, 420 and 468 r/w 34 IPC. After conducting investigation, final report was filed by the police against four accused alleging offence under Section 420 r/w 34 IPC. Before taking cognizance, another complaint was filed by the first respondent herein alleging that proper investigation was not conducted and that re- investigation/further investigation is to be conducted in the matter. That complaint was forwarded by the learned Magistrate under Secs.156(3) and 173(8) of Criminal Procedure Code This order is challenged by the person shown as accused in the final report filed earlier by the Investigating Officer.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no re-investigation can be ordered by the court suo motu or even at the instance of the complainant. If at all what can be ordered is only further investigation and that too only when a petition is filed under Section 173(8) of the Code by the Investigating Officer and not by filing a complaint like this, where the request was to forward the same under Section 156(3) and 173(8) of the Code. It is also submitted by the learned counsel that after receipt of the complaint (Annexure IV), the Investigating Officer filed a report as if he understood it as a direction to conduct re-investigation. Annexure III is the FIR submitted by the police officer before the learned Magistrate. There also, it was mentioned that the complaint filed under Secs.156(3) and 173(8) for re-investigation/further investigation, which was forwarded by court, was received. In Annexure IV, it was reported by the Circle Inspector of Police, Fort Kochi that in the light of the complaint received and the allegations mentioned therein a detailed re-investigation is required. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even the Investigating Officer has understood that the order passed by the learned Magistrate is for re- investigation and not for further investigation.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on getting the final report, before ordering further investigation even if it is permissible, the learned Magistrate should have applied his mind and for that purpose final report filed by the police should have been gone into and the complaint subsequently filed by the complainant also should have been gone into, to verify and find whether in fact a further investigation is required, whereas the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate would only show that the order was passed mechanically without applying his mind.