The Court observed that summoning of the accused is a serious issue, the magistrate cannot issue process mechanically as has been done in the instant case on the basis of vague and bald allegations.
The Single Bench of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul in a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC has observed that even the higher Court of the Country cannot issue a direction for reinvestigation of a case. In such circumstances, impugned FIR registered for reinvestigation cannot be sustained in law as such a course is neither provided nor permissible under the Code.
The Court observed that Powers of Superintendence vested in the High Court are similar to the inherent powers saved under Section 482 CrPC and there has been no appeal provided for against the orders passed by a Single Judge of the Court in exercise of such powers under Section 482 CrPC before the Court. Therefore, no LPA lies against the orders passed by a Judge of the Court in exercise of the powers under Section 482 CrPC.
The Court observed thus, the defect of not supplying the list of prosecution witnesses before issuance of process is curable, as Section 465 Cr.P.C. would come to the rescue of the respondent. On the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Court dismissed the petition.