TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Trial Stayed for CID to Probe Allegations; Special Investigation Team Formed for Comprehensive Examination.</h1> <h3>A.V. Dharma Reddy and Ors. Versus State of A.P. and Ors.</h3> The trial of C.C. No. 306 of 2009 was stayed pending further investigation by the CID. The HC directed the CID to conduct a comprehensive investigation, ... - Issues Involved:1. Legality of the Magistrate's power to return the charge sheet.2. Validity of the second charge sheet filed by a different police officer.3. Appropriateness of the lower court's order to implead additional accused u/s 319 Cr.P.C.4. Necessity for further investigation by the Crime Investigation Department (CID).Summary:1. Legality of the Magistrate's power to return the charge sheet:The court held that when a final report/charge sheet is filed, the Magistrate has no power or jurisdiction either under Cr.P.C. or under Criminal Rules of Practice to return the charge sheet questioning the propriety of the investigating officer. The Magistrate can only take cognizance of the case against some or all accused or reject the final report by giving reasons. Returning a charge sheet is permissible only for clerical or typographical errors.2. Validity of the second charge sheet filed by a different police officer:The court found that the process of filing a second charge sheet by another police officer, deleting names of two accused from the first final report, was unwarranted by law. The law does not empower an Additional Superintendent of Police to issue orders for such changes. The actions of the Magistrate and the investigating officer were deemed improper and without legal sanction.3. Appropriateness of the lower court's order to implead additional accused u/s 319 Cr.P.C.:The court noted that the lower court allowed the petition u/s 319 Cr.P.C. to issue summonses to additional accused based on the examination of P.Ws.1 and 2. However, the court entertained suspicion about the thoroughness of the investigation and expressed the need for further investigation. The court highlighted that the investigation was incomplete and lacked comprehensive evidence collection.4. Necessity for further investigation by the Crime Investigation Department (CID):The court emphasized the importance of a thorough investigation given the public interest and the involvement of a significant religious institution. It ordered further investigation by the CID of the State, directing the Additional Director General of Police, CID, Hyderabad, to form a Special Investigation Team. The CID was instructed to conduct a comprehensive investigation, not limited to the areas pointed out by the court, and to file periodical reports and an additional final report after the investigation.Conclusion:The trial of C.C. No. 306 of 2009 was stayed pending further investigation by the CID. The court directed the CID to examine all relevant aspects and individuals connected with the offence, irrespective of their status, to reach a logical conclusion. The petitions were posted for a report on 03.09.2010.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
