The Gujarat High Court ruled that police have the right to further investigate even after chargesheet submission, clarifying powers under Section 173(8) CrPC in corruption and criminal cases.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Ahmedabad: The Gujarat High Court has dismissed two petitions filed by Manoj Kumar, a senior postal officer, who was accused of facilitating the illegal exchange of demonetized currency worth Rs 1.04 crore during the 2016 note ban. The petitions challenged both the recording of witness statements and the filing of a supplementary charge sheet by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act).
The High Court ruled that the CBI’s supplementary charge sheet was valid as part of further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC, not a fresh probe, and dismissed the postal officer’s petitions.
Background of the Case
In March 2017, the CBI registered an FIR against senior officers of the Navrangpura Head Post Office, Ahmedabad, after a complaint from the Vigilance Department of the Postal Services. The allegations stated that during demonetization, the post office staff exchanged old notes in violation of government guidelines and postal circulars.
Manoj Kumar, then Deputy Postmaster General (DPS), Ahmedabad Circle, was accused of misusing his official position and facilitating illegal exchanges amounting to Rs 1,04,03,500 across post offices under his jurisdiction.
Issues Raised
The petitioner challenged:
Witness Statements (Section 164 CrPC):
Eight witnesses initially told the Magistrate they knew nothing about the case, but their statements were later recorded in detail within three hours on the same day. The petitioner argued these were invalid and obtained under pressure.
Supplementary Charge Sheet (Section 173(8) CrPC):
The CBI filed a supplementary charge sheet in February 2018 without seeking prior permission from the Magistrate. The petitioner argued that this amounted to an illegal reinvestigation
Court’s Reasoning
Justice J.C. Doshi rejected both contentions, holding that:
- On Witness Statements: Section 164 CrPC gives the Magistrate discretion to record statements as deemed fit. The timing of the recording does not invalidate the testimony. Evaluating evidentiary value at this stage would amount to a “mini-trial,” which is not permissible in quashing proceedings.
- On Supplementary Charge Sheet: The Court clarified that further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC is permissible even after filing the initial charge sheet. Such further investigation is a continuation of the same case, unlike a de novo or fresh investigation, which would restart the process. The CBI’s supplementary charge sheet, containing the prosecution sanction and additional evidence, was therefore valid.
The Court emphasized:
“Further investigation is just continuance of the investigation already done… Fresh, de novo or reinvestigation has the effect of wiping out the earlier investigation.”
The High Court dismissed both petitions, clearing the way for trial against the postal officer and others accused in the case.
Key Highlights
- Police/CBI can conduct further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC without prior Magistrate permission.
- Supplementary charge sheets are valid if they bring continuity to earlier findings.
- Allegations of procedural irregularity in witness statements cannot be adjudicated at the quashing stage; they must be tested during trial.
Case Title:
MANOJ KUMAR S/O BASUDEO UPADHYAY Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1776 of 2019
READ JUDGMENT HERE