38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, May 05, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Magistrate Has Power To Order Further Investigation U/S 156 (3) CrPC In Post-Cognizance Stage: SC [Read Judgment]

By LawStreet News Network      17 October, 2019 08:55 AM      0 Comments
Magistrate Has Power To Order Further Investigation U/S 156 (3) CrPC In Post-Cognizance Stage: SC [Read Judgment]

In a significant judgment on October 16, 2019, the Supreme Court, in the case of Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya and Ors. v. The State of Gujarat and Anr., has held that a Magistrate has power to order further investigation into an offence under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in post cognizance stage, until the trial commences.

The Bench comprising Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice Surya Kant and Justice V. Ramasubramanian passing the ruling has set aside a Gujarat High Court order which had held that post-cognizance a Magistrate would have no power to order further investigation into an offence.

The issue before the bench was whether after a charge-sheet is filed by the police, the Magistrate has the power to order further investigation, and if so, up to what stage of a criminal proceeding.

After examining the provisions of the code, the bench observed that the Magistrate's power under Section 156(3) of the CrPC is very wide, for it is this judicial authority that must be satisfied that a proper investigation by the police takes place. To ensure that a "proper investigation" takes place in the sense of a fair and just investigation by the police - which such Magistrate is to supervise - Article 21 of the Constitution of India mandates that all powers necessary, which may also be incidental or implied, are available to the Magistrate to ensure a proper investigation which, without doubt, would include the ordering of further investigation after a report is received by him under Section 173(2); and which power would continue to enure in such Magistrate at all stages of the criminal proceedings until the trial itself commences. Indeed, even textually, the "investigation" referred to in Section 156(1) of the CrPC would, as per the definition of "investigation" under Section 2(h), include all proceedings for collection of evidence conducted by a police officer; which would undoubtedly include proceedings by way of further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC.

The bench overruled 43 year old precedent

With the present judgment, the bench overruled the 43 year old precedent - Devarapalli Lakshminarayana Reddy & Ors. v. V. Narayana Reddy. In this case, the court held that "The power to order police investigation under Section 156(3) is different from the power to direct investigation conferred by Section 202(1). The two operate in distinct spheres at different stages. The first is exercisable at the pre-cognizance stage, the second at the post cognizance stage when the Magistrate is in seisin of the case.

Finding the above observation to be erroneous, the court in this regard said Section 2(h) is not noticed by the aforesaid judgment at all, resulting in the erroneous finding in law that the power under Section 156(3) can only be exercised at the pre-cognizance stage. The "investigation" spoken of in Section 156(3) would embrace the entire process, which begins with the collection of evidence and continues until charges are framed by the Court, at which stage the trial can be said to have begun. For these reasons, the statement of the law contained in paragraph 17 in Devarapalli Lakshminarayana Reddy (supra) cannot be relied upon.

[Read Judgment]



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

prior-notice-mandatory-before-property-demolition-section-405-power-not-absolute-andhra-pradesh-hc
Trending Judiciary
Prior Notice Mandatory Before Property Demolition, Section 405 Power Not Absolute: Andhra Pradesh HC [Read Order]

Andhra Pradesh High Court rules demolition without notice illegal; Section 405 is enabling, not absolute, and must follow natural justice.

04 May, 2026 04:11 PM
sc-dismisses-tmc-plea-on-exclusion-of-state-officials-as-counting-supervisors-records-eci-assurance
Trending Judiciary
SC Dismisses TMC Plea on Exclusion of State Officials as Counting Supervisors, Records ECI Assurance

Supreme Court declines TMC plea on counting supervisors, records ECI assurance to follow its circular in West Bengal Assembly elections.

04 May, 2026 05:07 PM

TOP STORIES

private-neighbourhood-schools-cannot-refuse-admission-to-students-allotted-by-state-under-rte-act-on-ground-of-eligibility-dispute-sc
Trending Judiciary
Private Neighbourhood Schools Cannot Refuse Admission to Students Allotted by State Under RTE Act on Ground of Eligibility Dispute: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules private schools must admit RTE-allotted students without delay; eligibility disputes cannot be grounds to deny admission under Article 21A.

29 April, 2026 11:55 AM
meghalaya-murder-case-shillong-court-grants-bail-to-accused-wife-over-failure-to-communicate-grounds-of-arrest
Trending Judiciary
Meghalaya Murder Case: Shillong Court Grants Bail to Accused Wife Over Failure to Communicate Grounds of Arrest

Shillong court grants bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi in Meghalaya murder case, citing failure to communicate arrest grounds and violation of Article 22(1).

29 April, 2026 12:55 PM
court-sentences-bjp-mla-nitesh-rane-to-one-months-imprisonment-for-humiliating-engineer-by-making-him-walk-through-muddy-water-in-public
Trending Judiciary
Court Sentences BJP MLA Nitesh Rane to One Month’s Imprisonment for Humiliating Engineer by Making Him Walk Through Muddy Water in Public [Read Judgment]

Sindhudurg court sentences Nitesh Rane to 1 month jail under IPC Sec 504 for forcing engineer to walk through muddy water; others acquitted.

29 April, 2026 01:53 PM
bombay-hc-adjourns-9-year-defamation-suit-to-2046-calls-it-an-ego-fight-between-senior-citizens
Trending Judiciary
Bombay HC Adjourns 9-Year Defamation Suit to 2046, Calls It an “Ego Fight” Between Senior Citizens [Read Order]

Bombay High Court adjourns 9-year defamation suit to 2046, calling it an “ego fight” between senior citizens and declining priority hearing.

29 April, 2026 02:02 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email