2009 (4) TMI 928 - SC - Income Tax

Whether there is no illegality or irregularity in summoning the witnesses named in the supplementary charge-sheet?

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against High Court order rejecting criminal revision on summoning witnesses from supplementary charge-sheet.

Analysis:
1. Background: The case involved an appeal against the High Court order rejecting a criminal revision filed by the appellant against the order allowing the prosecution to summon witnesses named in a supplementary charge-sheet.

2. Facts of the Case: The case originated from a police report filed against the appellant and others under IPC sections. Subsequently, a supplementary charge-sheet was submitted with additional witnesses, leading to an application by the prosecution to summon these new witnesses during the trial.

3. Legal Arguments: The appellant argued that further investigation at this stage would delay the trial and prejudice the defense. On the other hand, the State contended that further investigation is a statutory right of the police, and the prosecution can produce any necessary witness as per Section 231 of Cr.P.C.

4. Interpretation of Section 173: The Court analyzed Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C., which allows further investigation even after the submission of a police report. It clarified that further investigation is distinct from fresh or reinvestigation and is aimed at supplementing the existing evidence.

5. Judicial Precedents: Referring to legal precedents, the Court emphasized that the goal of further investigation is to discover the truth and ensure substantial justice, even if it leads to trial delays. The Court highlighted that the hands of the investigating agency should not be tied down due to mere delays.

6. Court's Decision: The Court upheld the trial court's order allowing the summoning of witnesses from the supplementary charge-sheet. It emphasized that further investigation is a statutory right of the police, and the prosecution can produce additional witnesses as necessary, even during the trial.

7. Conclusion: The Court dismissed the appeal, stating that there were no valid grounds for interference. It affirmed the trial court's decision to summon witnesses from the supplementary charge-sheet, as it was in line with legal provisions and aimed at discovering the truth in the case.