Magistrate's power to order further investigation survives after cognizance, but not fresh reinvestigation; separate FIR required on distinct allegations.

A Magistrate's power to order further investigation is a continuing supervisory power under the Criminal Procedure Code, read with Article 21, and it survives after cognizance and issuance of process until trial commences. The Court held that this power does not extend to directing fresh or de novo reinvestigation in a case based on a police report. On the facts, the material placed was treated as a separate cross-complaint concerning alleged falsity in revenue entries, so further investigation in the pending FIR was not warranted. Instead, the communication disclosed distinct allegations requiring registration of a fresh FIR and investigation by a senior police officer.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a Magistrate can direct further investigation after cognizance has been taken and process has been issued, and up to what stage such power survives; (ii) Whether the facts placed for further investigation in the present case warranted such a direction, or instead required registration of a separate FIR.

Issue (i): Whether a Magistrate can direct further investigation after cognizance has been taken and process has been issued, and up to what stage such power survives.

Analysis: The statutory scheme of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 distinguishes investigation, inquiry, and trial. Section 2(h) defines investigation broadly enough to include all proceedings for collection of evidence, while Section 173(8) expressly preserves further investigation after the police report is forwarded. Reading Sections 156(3) and 173(8) with Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the power of the Magistrate to secure a fair and proper investigation is not exhausted on filing of the charge-sheet. The Court held that a Magistrate may direct further investigation till the trial commences, that is, before charges are framed in the appropriate procedural stage, and that the contrary view in later cases could not stand. However, a Magistrate has no power to direct fresh investigation or de novo reinvestigation in a case founded on a police report.

Conclusion: The Magistrate does have power to direct further investigation after cognizance, and that power continues until the commencement of trial.

Issue (ii): Whether the facts placed for further investigation in the present case warranted such a direction, or instead required registration of a separate FIR.

Analysis: The allegations in the applications for further investigation were found to be distinct from the FIR already under investigation and substantially in the nature of a cross-complaint concerning alleged falsity in revenue entries and related acts. The Court held that those matters did not justify further investigation in the pending FIR. At the same time, the Court treated the revenue commissioner's communication as disclosing separate allegations serious enough to require a fresh FIR and investigation by a senior police officer. Accordingly, the order directing further investigation in the existing case was not sustained, but a separate FIR was directed on the basis of the communication.

Conclusion: Further investigation in the pending FIR was not warranted, but a separate FIR was required on the basis of the communication dated 15.03.2011.

Final Conclusion: The judgment clarifies that a Magistrate's supervisory power to secure fair investigation survives after cognizance and up to the commencement of trial, but on the facts of this case the requested further investigation in the existing FIR was rejected while a fresh FIR was directed on separate allegations.

Ratio Decidendi: The Magistrate's power to order further investigation is a continuing supervisory power, grounded in Sections 156(3) and 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and informed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and it remains available until the trial commences.

---