ANANT THANUR KARMUSE versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS

Citation: [2023] 3 S.C.R. 56 · Decided: 24-02-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

cites 6 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
56
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 3 S.C.R.
   [2023] 3 S.C.R. 56
56
ANANT THANUR KARMUSE
v.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
(Criminal Appeal No.13 of 2023)
FEBRUARY 24, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.173(8) –Further
Investigation – Transfer of Investigation to CBI –Appellant shared
a viral picture of then Cabinet Minister on facebook–As per him,
appellant was forcibly took from his residence by police officers
and beaten up and threatened by the police – FIR lodged by
appellant, however, name of the Cabinet Minister not named in FIR
– Writ Petition was filed in the High Court seeking transfer of
investigation to CBI or to any other agency–During the pendency
of the writ petition, the trial Court framed the charges against the
accused on the basis of the chargesheets filed –The High Court
refused to transfer the investigation –High Court while dismissing
the petition observed that once the charges have been framed by
the Magistrate/Trial Court and therefore, it can be said that the
trial has begun and therefore, thereafter, re- investigation/further
investigation is not permissible– On appeal, held : Investigation
may be transferred to the CBI only in “rare and exceptional cases”
–High Court has not committed any error in refusing to transfer the
investigation to CBI –The real investigation started only after the
intervention of the High Court and after passing various orders in
the present proceedings by the High Court – Even according to the
State investigating agency, still the further investigation is required
on certain aspects – The victim has a fundamental right of fair
investigation and fair trial –Therefore, mere filing of the chargesheet
and framing of the charges cannot be an impediment in ordering
further investigation / re-investigation / de novo investigation, if
the facts so warrant – No proper investigation by the State
investigating agency at the relevant time and even the material
evidences were also not collected – High Court has committed a
very serious error in not ordering and/or permitting the State police
agency to further investigate into the FIR.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
57
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD :1.Bearing in mind the position of law, in the facts,
and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that
the High Court has not committed any error in refusing to transfer
the investigation to CBI. Even the appellant has not vehemently
pressed such a prayer. The Court is in complete agreement with
the view taken by the High Court insofar as refusing to transfer
the investigation to CBI is concerned. Applying the law laid down
by this Court in the case of Dharam Pal and Bharati Tamang and
to do the complete justice and in furtherance of fair investigation
and fair trial, the constitutional courts may order further
investigation / re-investigation / de novo investigation even after
the charge sheet is filed and the charges are framed.[Paras 7.4
and 11][70-E-F; 75-D]
3. It is required to be noted that in the present case, the
allegations in the FIR, right from very beginning, were against
the accused No. 13, who at the relevant time was the sitting
Cabinet Minister occupying the high position. Even at the
relevant time, when the State Police investigated the FIR bearing
No. 120 of 2020, in the first chargesheet and the second
chargesheet did not name the accused No. 13. Even the
investigation was also conducted in a perfunctory manner. The
real investigation started only after the intervention of the High
Court and after passing various orders in the present proceedings
by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR were very serious
including the misuse of powers by the sitting Cabinet Minister
and of abducting, kidnapping and beating the complainant.[Para
12.1][75-G-H; 76-A-B]
4. Be that as it may,even according to the State investigating
agency, the further investigation is required. As observed and
held by this Court in its various decisions, the victim has a
fundamental right of fair investigation and fair trial. Therefore,
mere filing of the chargesheet and framing of the charges cannot
be an impediment in ordering further investigation / re-
investigation / de novo investigation, if the facts so warrant. [Para
12.3][77-B]
5. The endeavour of the Court should be to have the fair
investigation and fair trial only. Therefore, in the facts and
ANANT THANUR KARMUSE  v.  THE STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.