Authority: Gauhati High Court (Assam High Court)

Order Date: 10 August 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioners: Assam Cricket Association (a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, headquartered at ACA Stadium, Barsapara, Guwahati) represented by its Secretary, Sri Sanatan Das, and its Chief Executive Officer, Sri Pritam Mahanta.
  • Respondents: The State of Assam (represented by the Public Prosecutor), Pradip Buragohain (former honorary Secretary of the Association), and Manindra Nath Saikia (former honorary Secretary of the Association).
  • Nature of Proceeding: Criminal Petition (Crl.Pet.1470/2025) filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 seeking quashing of the order dated 21‑03‑2025 passed by the Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S), No. 1, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati, in PRC Case No. 1881/2022.
  • Background: A resolution passed at the Association’s General Body on 28‑08‑2021 led to the lodging of an FIR on 06‑12‑2021 (FIR No. 817/2021) alleging large‑scale financial anomalies in the period 12‑06‑2016 to 12‑01‑2019 while the respondents were honorary Secretaries. The FIR resulted in registration of a case under IPC Sections 120B, 420, 409, 468, 469, 471.
  • Charge Sheet: Submitted on 30‑03‑2022, naming respondents Buragohain and Saikia, and containing an endorsement that further investigation might be required to identify additional accused persons and that a supplementary charge sheet would be filed whenever required.
  • Procedural History: The case was taken cognizance by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 21‑06‑2022 and transferred to the Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate. On 14‑11‑2024 the Officer‑in‑Charge of Fatashil Ambari Police Station filed two contradictory status reports: one stating the investigation was ongoing and another stating it was completed with no supplementary charge sheet. The magistrate directed the officer to appear on 20‑12‑2024; the officer appeared and submitted a report. On 21‑03‑2025 the magistrate concluded that no supplementary charge sheet would be filed and fixed the trial for 28‑11‑2025.
  • Petitioners’ Contentions: Argued that the contradictory reports indicated foul play, that the investigation was incomplete, and that under Section 173(8) CrPC the police must obtain prior court permission before conducting further investigation or filing a supplementary charge sheet. They sought quashing of the magistrate’s order and direction for further investigation.
  • Respondents’ Contentions: Stated that the petitioners had not impleaded the police officer as a necessary party, that the magistrate correctly proceeded based on the report of 20‑12‑2024, and that the respondents were entitled to a speedy trial. They also argued that no permission was sought for further investigation, making any such continuation unlawful.
  • Public Prosecutor’s Observation: Highlighted the contradictory reports and the absence of the 20‑12‑2024 report in the scanned court record, requesting its production for proper adjudication.
  • Legal Analysis by the Court:
  • Reiterated that after filing a charge sheet, further investigation may be undertaken only with prior permission of the court under Section 173(8) CrPC, as clarified by Supreme Court judgments (Vinay Tyagi v. Irshad Ali, Pramod Kumar v. U.P., Vinubhai Haribhai Malviya, etc.).
  • Noted that the endorsement in the charge sheet alone does not constitute lawful permission for further investigation.
  • Observed that the police officer’s contradictory reports lacked legal relevance because any further investigation without court sanction is ultra vires.
  • Concluded that the magistrate’s order to proceed with trial, based on the report of 20‑12‑2024, was not infirmed by the petitioners’ arguments.

Final Outcome

  • The Criminal Petition is dismissed.
  • The order dated 21‑03‑2025 of the Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate, directing the trial of respondents Pradip Buragohain and Manindra Nath Saikia, stands affirmed.
  • A copy of the judgment is to be sent to the Sub‑Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati.

Topics: Court Order, Criminal Procedure