Magistrate Not Empowered Under Section 190 CrPC To Direct Further Investigation Suo Motu Or On Application Of Any...
Magistrate’s Power under Section 190 CrPC: Not Empowered to Direct Further Investigation Suo Motu or on Application
1. Understanding Section 190 CrPC
Section 190 CrPC empowers a Magistrate to take cognizance of an offence:
On receipt of a complaint,
Upon a police report, or
Otherwise (e.g., on personal knowledge).
Upon taking cognizance, the Magistrate may:
Order a police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC, or
Direct issuance of process (summons/warrant).
2. No Express Power Under Section 190 to Order Further Investigation
Section 190 CrPC itself does not explicitly empower the Magistrate to order further investigation once a charge sheet is filed.
After initial investigation and filing of the charge sheet, the Magistrate’s role is limited to:
Considering the charge sheet and
Issuing process if there is prima facie case,
Or rejecting if there is no prima facie case.
3. Who Can Direct Further Investigation?
Section 173(8) CrPC specifically deals with further investigation.
The investigating officer, on his own motion, or on the direction of the Magistrate or higher authorities, can carry out further investigation.
However, the Magistrate cannot suo motu order further investigation under Section 190 without a request or direction from the police or higher authorities.
4. Judicial Interpretation & Case Laws
⚖️ Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani, AIR 1978 SC 1025
The Supreme Court observed that after investigation, it is the duty of the police to submit the charge sheet.
The Magistrate’s power is limited to taking cognizance and issuing process, not to directing further investigation on their own motion.
⚖️ Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal, AIR 1996 SC 1713
It was held that a Magistrate does not have the power under Section 190 CrPC to order further investigation suo motu.
The Magistrate can ask the police to investigate, but this must be on a specific application or complaint, not by suo motu action.
⚖️ Dinesh Dalmia v. Union of India, AIR 1967 SC 219
Clarified that the Magistrate’s role is judicial, and he cannot act as an investigating authority.
Directing further investigation is primarily the police’s domain.
⚖️ State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604
The Supreme Court laid down guidelines on how Magistrates should deal with requests for investigation or further investigation.
It emphasized that Magistrates should not act arbitrarily in ordering investigation without material or credible information.
⚖️ Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273
The Supreme Court underscored that the Magistrate must exercise caution and cannot initiate investigation or direct further investigation merely based on the suspicion.
5. Practical Implications
If a party feels investigation is incomplete or unsatisfactory, the remedy is:
To approach the police authorities or
To file an appropriate application under Section 156(3) CrPC for police investigation, or
To file a complaint before the Magistrate requesting investigation.
However, the Magistrate cannot order further investigation suo motu under Section 190.
Magistrates must exercise judicial restraint and only order investigation when there is credible material.
6. Summary Table
| Aspect | Legal Position |
|---|---|
| Power under Section 190 | Magistrate can take cognizance and issue process, but not order further investigation suo motu. |
| Ordering further investigation | Possible under Section 173(8) and Section 156(3) CrPC on police initiation or upon complaint/application. |
| Magistrate’s role | Judicial, not investigative; cannot direct police to investigate without credible material. |
| Remedy for incomplete investigation | Approach police or file complaint/application; Magistrate acts only on credible material. |
7. Conclusion
Section 190 CrPC does not empower the Magistrate to order further investigation suo motu or on an application without credible material.
Magistrates should ensure that investigation directions are based on material and legal grounds, not arbitrary decisions.
This preserves the separation of powers between the investigative and judicial functions and maintains the integrity of the criminal justice system.
RELATED Blog
0 comments