Liberty to seek further investigation is not a direction authorising it.

A Coordinate Bench had disposed of respondent no. 2’s earlier application by granting the Investigating Officer and informant liberty to apply to the trial court for further investigation under Section 193(9) of the BNSS, 2023; it did not itself direct further investigation

On 30 September 2026, the Investigating Officer applied to the trial court, apparently relying on a communication from the Deputy Director (Law) that inaccurately described the Coordinate Bench’s order as directing further investigation.

Respondent no. 2 later submitted that a separate application supported by the certified judgment had been considered and that a subsequent order dated 6 October 2026 had also directed further investigation

Anant Jain challenged the order dated 30 September 2026

Whether the Coordinate Bench’s order dated 29 September 2026 itself directed further investigation, or merely granted liberty to apply to the trial court under Section 193(9) of the BNSS, 2023

Whether the trial court’s order dated 30 September 2026, passed on the basis of a communication that misstated the Coordinate Bench’s directions, could be sustained

Section 193(9) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 was the statutory basis for seeking further investigation.

Where a superior court grants liberty to apply for further investigation, rather than directing that investigation itself, the trial court must independently consider the application by examining the case diary and other relevant materials and decide it in accordance with law

An order founded on an erroneous understanding of the superior court’s directions cannot be sustained

The Coordinate Bench’s order expressly left the question of further investigation to the trial court upon an appropriate application and consideration of the relevant materials

The 30 September order was instead passed on the basis of a communication that incorrectly represented the Coordinate Bench as having directed further investigation, without verification of the actual judgment

The trial court’s decision therefore proceeded on an erroneous understanding of the earlier order and could not stand.

The later order of 6 October 2026 was noted, but the Court’s determination in this application concerned the impugned order dated 30 September 2026

It set aside the trial court’s order dated 30 September 2026 directing further investigation in Case Crime No. 239 of 2024 and disposed of the criminal miscellaneous application