Appellant has filed an application looking for to join as the respondent for further investigation. The investigation was against those persons who were dismissed by HC. The issue in the appeal was that whether the appellant, who is one of the co-accused against whom the charge-sheet is already filed and against whom the trial is in progress, is required to be heard and/or has any locus in the proceedings under Section 173(8) of CrPC further investigation qua one another accused namely Shri Bhaumik against whom no charge-sheet has been filed till date.

The bench referred to the observation made in Sri. Bhagwan Samardha v. State of A.P. (1999) 5 SCC 740: There is nothing in Section 173(8) to suggest that the court is obliged to hear the accused before any direction is made. Such obligation will only be cast on the Court and would result in burdening the Court with the burden of searching for all the potential accused to be afforded with the opportunity of being heard. Magistrate would not be burdened as it is not provided under the law.

The SC has reiterated that a court is not obliged to hear the accused before any direction for further investigation is made under Section 173(8) of CrPC. The Appeal was dismissed and stated that no error was committed by HC.