give final report to complainant: Karnataka HC asks DGP
1. Section 173 CrPC | Direct all investigating agencies to give final report to complainant: Karnataka HC asks DGP, IG
2. ====+====+====+====+====
3. The Karnataka High Court recently directed the Inspector General of Police and the Director General of Police to direct all investigating officers of the investigating agencies to prepare for the preparation After this , give the final report to the first complainant first, as prescribed in Section 173(2)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
4. Under Section 173(2)(ii), it is mandatory for the investigating officer to report the action taken on his behalf, in the manner prescribed by the state government . Inform the person , if any, who reported the commission of the crime, first.
5. A bench headed by Justice K Natarajan passed the direction while accepting a petition filed by a person named B Prashanth Hegde, who has appointed additional CMM Bengaluru as an Indian. Offences punishable under IPC sections 120B, 403, 408, 409, 447, 381 , 420 against State Bank of India and Punjab National Bank He had sought a direction to take cognizance.
6. Hegde submitted that he had levelled various charges against bank officials, SBI and Punjab National Bank officials for misappropriating funds and cheating the complainant. A complaint was filed . The case was referred to CID police for investigation and respondent-CID police filed a charge sheet against the officials of the above two banks .
7. But the investigating officer did not include the bank as an accused while filing the final report.
8. It was argued that the offence was committed by corporate bodies like State Bank of India and Punjab National Bank . Therefore, the body corporate is required to be made an accused otherwise, the bank officials cannot be held guilty without making the bank an accused .
9. Further, it was argued that the trial court had to direct the police officer to investigate further and create additional charge sheets and take cognizance against the corporate body i.e. banks. Can give instructions .
10. The prosecution said the magistrate can also take cognizance during the trial by invoking Section 319 of the CrPC or Section 305 of the CrPC .
11.conclusion
12. " In this case, it is held that no communication has been sent by the investigating officer to the first complainant regarding submission of the final report. Referring to Section 173(2)(ii) of the CrPC, the bench said, "The legislature has first used the word 'shall' to communicate the final report to the complainant. I have experimented.
13.Of course, the mode of communication is to be issued by the state government, but no such information was sent to the complainant by the investigating officer
14. As far as action against the banks is concerned, the High Court was of the view that before the trial court takes cognizance, the investigating officer should make the corporate body an accused and make the accused The discretion should have been exercised to direct the bank to proceed to take cognizance, otherwise against the bank officials without making the bank an accused. The proceedings will not be sustainable.
15."Of course, the court can invoke Section 319 of the CrPC to include the bank as a co-accused or additional accused or the company or the bank of the CrPC . Otherwise, the police officer has to file an additional charge sheet under Section 173(8) of the CrPC against the corporate body. Directions may be given, as the accused persons are indirectly liable for the offence committed by the bank .
16. Thus,
17. The court directed the trial court to take cognisance of the two banks in accordance with law or direct the investigating officer to conduct further investigation and proceed with the CrPC. According to Section 173(8), the bank should file an additional charge sheet by showing it as an accused.
18.Case Title:- B Prashanth Hegde and State of Karnataka
19.Case No :- Writ Petition No. 18864/2021