Locus standi in further investigation proceedings denied to a charge-sheeted co-accused where no impleadment was legally required.

A charge-sheeted co-accused had no locus standi or legal necessity to be impleaded in proceedings under Section 173(8) CrPC seeking further investigation against another proposed accused, because even that proposed accused had no right to be heard at that stage. Rule 51 of the Gujarat High Court Rules, 1993 did not apply to such proceedings, as they were not equivalent to an appeal or an application arising from a criminal case within the meaning of that rule. The refusal to implead the co-accused was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether a charge-sheeted co-accused had locus standi or was a necessary and proper party in proceedings under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking further investigation against another person, and whether Rule 51 of the Gujarat High Court Rules, 1993 required his impleadment.

Analysis: The application before the High Court arose from a request for further investigation against a different proposed accused who had not been charge-sheeted. The Court held that even the proposed accused had no right to be heard at that stage under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In that situation, a co-accused already charge-sheeted, against whom no relief for further investigation was sought and whose trial was already proceeding, could not claim a better position or establish any legal necessity to be impleaded. The Court further held that Rule 51 of the Gujarat High Court Rules, 1993 did not apply to proceedings of this kind, as such proceedings are not equivalent to an appeal or application arising from a criminal case in the sense contemplated by that Rule.

Conclusion: The Court upheld the refusal to implead the co-accused and held that he had no locus standi or right to be heard in the further investigation proceedings.

---