Article 140: Closing an investigation: options

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 1016/2567 (2024)

   Which inquiry official in the locality is the responsible official empowered to summarize the file and give a prosecute/no-prosecute opinion under section 140 is a question of fact.

   The accused argued the investigation was unlawful under section 140 and the prosecutor lacked power to prosecute under section 120. The Supreme Court held this was a dispute over which local officer was the responsible inquiry official, a factual question, so the further appeal was barred under section 218 paragraph one and was not accepted for adjudication.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 4732/2560 (2017)

   Where an offence is committed outside the Kingdom, the responsible inquiry official is the one the Attorney General assigns under Section 20, not one identified by the ordinary rules. Where the Attorney General has made that assignment, the investigation is lawful and the prosecutor has power to bring the case.

   The defendant argued that whoever acted as responsible inquiry official had no authority, so the investigation was unlawful and the prosecutor could not bring the case. The Supreme Court rejected that. The public fraud, from the telephone calls that deceived the four injured persons in Australia to their transfers into a Hong Kong account, was committed outside the Kingdom within Section 20. The Attorney General had assigned the National Police Office team as responsible inquiry officials, so that team had power to investigate under Section 20 paragraph one, the investigation was lawful and the prosecutor had power to bring the case.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.