High Court deems consulting Prosecutor for charge-sheet impermissible, emphasizes investigating officer's independence.

The High Court's direction for the investigating officer to consult the Public Prosecutor and submit a fresh charge-sheet based on the Prosecutor's opinion was deemed impermissible. The Court clarified that involving the Prosecutor in the investigation process was legally unsound and interfered with the investigating officer's responsibilities. The case involved a suicide where the High Court ordered an amended charge-sheet, but the appellant successfully challenged this directive. The investigating officer's independence in forming opinions during investigations was emphasized, leading to the appeal being allowed and the High Court's order being set aside.

---

---

Issues:
1. Can a High Court direct an investigating officer to consult the Public Prosecutor and submit a fresh charge-sheet based on the Public Prosecutor's opinionRs.
2. Is it permissible in law for a High Court to order the investigating officer to take back the final report and file a fresh report incorporating the Public Prosecutor's opinionRs.

Analysis:
1. The judgment discusses the distinction between investigation and prosecution in the administration of criminal justice. It emphasizes that the role of the Public Prosecutor is within the court, while investigation is conducted outside the court. The judgment clarifies that involving the Public Prosecutor in the investigation process is inappropriate and legally unsound. The investigating agency cannot be compelled to seek the opinion of a Public Prosecutor under court orders. The case in question involved a High Court directing the investigating officer to consult the Public Prosecutor and submit a fresh charge-sheet based on the Public Prosecutor's opinion. The judgment concludes that such a directive is impermissible in law as it interferes with the investigative process and the responsibilities of the investigating officer.

2. The case involved a young bride's suicide, leading to an investigation and submission of a challan against the husband and his mother for specific offenses. The bride's father was dissatisfied with the challan as other family members were not implicated. The High Court directed the investigating officer to consult the Public Prosecutor and submit an amended charge-sheet based on the Public Prosecutor's opinion. The appellant challenged this directive, arguing that the High Court's order was erroneous. The judgment delves into the legal provisions governing investigation under the Criminal Procedure Code, highlighting that the investigating officer's opinion on filing a charge-sheet is final and should not be influenced by external authorities like the Public Prosecutor. It cites precedents and legal principles to establish that the investigating officer's independence is crucial in forming opinions during investigations. Therefore, the High Court's directive to incorporate the Public Prosecutor's opinion in the charge-sheet was deemed illegal, leading to the appeal being allowed and the impugned order being set aside.

---