The Allahabad High Court has held that a trial court cannot ignore a final report submitted after further investigation while proceeding to frame charges. The Court observed that if cognizance has already been taken on an initial charge sheet and the police subsequently file a final report upon further investigation, the trial court is duty-bound to consider both reports conjointly before proceeding further.
The Court categorically observed that,
“Hence, it becomes abundantly clear that if a Final Report is submitted by the police after the submission of the charge sheet upon which the Magistrate has already passed an order taking cognizance, he will have to pass another order on the Final Report after applying his judicial mind to the contents available in both reports. He will have to assess both the reports conjointly for arriving at a conclusion.”
The order was passed by Justice Anil Kumar – X while allowing a Criminal Appeal filed by Sonu and others.
According to the case records, an FIR was lodged against the appellants at Police Station Kotwali, Kannauj under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(d) of the SC/ST Act. After investigation, a charge sheet was submitted on 15 September 2023, upon which cognizance was taken on 21 December 2023.
Thereafter, further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC, the Investigating Officer submitted a final report on 31 March 2024, declaring the allegations to be false. The trial court, without examining the final report, went on to frame charges, thereby aggrieving the appellants and leading to the present appeal.
The High Court relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court of India in Vinay Tyagi vs Irshad Ali @ Deepak & Ors, Ram Lal Narang Etc vs State Of Delhi, Dharmatma Singh vs Harminder Singh & Ors.
The Court restated that each police report, irrespective of its nature, must be read and appreciated collectively before any further procedural action is undertaken.
Clarifying the stage of cognizance, the Court observed that taking cognizance is not the final stage of criminal proceedings. The Magistrate’s role does not conclude merely on accepting the initial charge sheet.
Just as the Investigating Officer is obligated to carry the investigation to its logical conclusion even after filing a primary report, the Magistrate has a continuing duty to independently apply judicial mind to any subsequent or supplementary report filed by the police.
The Court also noted that “This ensures the Magistrate’s continuing duty to independently evaluate supplementary police reports post-cognizance, maintaining procedural fairness.”
The Allahabad High Court clarified that a supplementary report merges with and forms part of the original charge sheet and cannot be treated in isolation. It further clarified that while Section 362 CrPC bars review of a final judgment, it does not preclude the court from considering subsequent investigative material placed on record. Hence, Section 173(8) CrPC did not fetter the trial court’s jurisdiction to examine the final report.
Consequently, the impugned order of framing charges was quashed, and the trial court was directed to reconsider the matter a fresh on conjoint evaluation of the original charge sheet and the subsequent final report.
The Court further directed that a copy of the judgment be circulated to all district courts across the State for compliance and guidance.
Case: Sonu And 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another
Date of Order: 13.02.2026
See the Order: Sonu And 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another
