Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Monday, 21 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2017-02-02 dismissed

Amrutbhai Shambhubhai Patel vs Sumanbhai Kantibhai Patel & Ors

Bench: 2 — Amitava Roy

In Brief

A complainant lodged an FIR against respondents alleging forgery and criminal breach of trust relating to agricultural land. After the police filed a charge-sheet and trial commenced, the informant applied at the trial's closing stage for further investigation by the Forensic Science Laboratory. The trial court granted this request, but the High Court set it aside, holding that only the investigating agency—not the trial court or informant—can direct further investigation after cognizance is taken and the accused appears. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court, holding that once cognizance is taken and an accused appears, a Magistrate has no power to direct further investigation suo motu or on an informant's request; such power is exclusively vested in the investigating agency. The appeal was dismissed.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Procedure Police Investigation Magistrate Powers Further Investigation Charge Sheet Trial Procedure

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login