https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298510 The Supreme Court held that the appellant, a co-accused already charge-sheeted and undergoing trial, had no right to be heard in the application for further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC concerning another accused, Mr. Bhaumik. The Court determined that the appellant had no locus in the matter, and Rule 51 of the Gujarat High Court Rules did not apply to proceedings under Section 173(8) CrPC. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's decision to reject the appellant's application to be impleaded as a party respondent. en-us Mon, 02 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 07 Nov 2021 11:04:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298510 The Supreme Court held that the appellant, a co-accused already charge-sheeted and undergoing trial, had no right to be heard in the application for further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC concerning another accused, Mr. Bhaumik. The Court determined that the appellant had no locus in the matter, and Rule 51 of the Gujarat High Court Rules did not apply to proceedings under Section 173(8) CrPC. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's decision to reject the appellant's application to be impleaded as a party respondent. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 02 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298510