Guwahati’s HC denies CBI’s legit existence, bizarrely

Friday, 8 November 2013 By Legally India Bar, Bench & Litigation

The Gauhati high court on Wednesday struck down the 1963 resolution setting up the Central Bureau of Investigation – the government’s primary investigating agency – and declared it unconstitutional, saying it should be stripped of its powers to probe, file first information reports, arrest suspects and file chargesheets [PTI].

The centre will move the Supreme Court against the judgement delivered by a division bench comprised of justices IA Ansari and Indira Shah, reported NDTV today. [Full text of judgment]

The court held:

“We hereby…set aside and quash the impugned Resolution, dated April 1, 1963, whereby CBI has been constituted… We do hold that the CBI is neither an organ nor a part of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) and the CBI cannot be treated as a ‘police force’ constituted under the DSPE Act, 1946.”

The bench added that the resolution was not law because it was neither the result of a union cabinet decision nor was it part of executive instructions that have received presidential assent, but it was at best a set of departmental instructions which cannot be treated as law.

CBI director Ranjit Sinha told NDTV that the order would not affect ongoing investigations and trials as the CBI would seek an immediate stay on it.

The high court’s order was made in a petition challenging a CBI charge-sheet against a Mahanagar Telephone Nigam (MTNL) employee, which ended up questioning the legitimacy of the agency for the first time in its 50-year existence.

Gauhati high court Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)

Comments

Hoodibaba 8 Nov 2013, 15:21

+6 -0

This is an excellent judgment. Absolutely professional work by the Advocates for Appellants Dr. L. S. Choudhury, Mr. D.S. Choudhury and Mr. R.P. Singh, the Amicus Curaie Mr. N. Dutta must also be appreciated for their work.

This is a beautiful and well written judgment and any one with interest even if it is cursory in Constitutional Law must read this judgment. Certain repetitions in paragraphs may be ignored for the quality of the judgment is itself impeccable.

The two Judges IA Ansari and Indira Shah must be really appreciated for their thorough analysis and having what it takes to take the unusual but very well researched and pointed out point of law.

For every one in the profession of law, this should be a proud moment to see such excellent judgment and excellent work of advocates.

Legally India if it has some contacts in Gauhati must send some one to get an interview of the advocates (Both sides and Amicus Curaie).

pi 8 Nov 2013, 17:55

+1 -0

if we use a strict interpretation of law and ignore the precedents by other HCs then this is a perfectly legal judgement; i think time has come for cbi to have its own act; from the angle of conspiracy theory - cbi has been asking for more powers, so they should be happy that parliament is going to enact the act and leave rules to bureaucrats making it easier for cbi to be a freer pegion which though allowed some leeway has to come back to its master at the end of the day

Guest 9 Nov 2013, 10:07

+4 -0

The word "bizarrely" is inappropriate. The judgment is based on sound reasons. The argument that the judgment is misplaced merely because the Apex Court has entrusted investigation in various high profile cases to the CBI is misconceived. The fact that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has entrusted investigation by the CBI in certain cases cannot validate the establishment of the CBI if the same required compliance with a prescribed procedure. As a matter of fact, unless the Hon'ble Supreme Court had ruled in the past on the specific issue of legality of establishment of the CBI, it cannot be said that the SC has indirectly approved the establishment of CBI just because it has directed for investigation by the CBI into certain cases. The file notings and the constituent assembly debates quoted in the judgment as well as the defence advanced by the Government counsel are interesting and any one interested in criticizing the judgment of the HC must go through the same before making any comments.

Guest 10 Nov 2013, 04:11

Kian I don't know if you are like Indian news channels (who black out scoops by competitors) but I hope you will cover what is clearly one of the most shocking stories in post-independent India.

http://www.lawctopus.com/through-my-looking-glass-when-a-sc-judge-sexually-assaulted-a-law-student-intern/

I remember that the MSM had blacked out the Barkha Dutt Radia scam but were forced to cover it after pressure from the blogosphere. I hope you will be courageous enough to cover this story.

Another Guest 10 Nov 2013, 15:32

+0 -0

Yes, this story needs to be covered here. http://jilsblognujs.wordpress.com/2013/11/06/through-my-looking-glass/

Anonymous 13 Nov 2013, 12:09

Ms Prachi......by what authority do you call the verdict bizarre?

kianganz 13 Nov 2013, 12:14

Headlines are often not written by stories' reporters.

However, it is definitely bizarre if a government institution that has been functioning for decades, turns out never to have been legal in the first place.

On the flip side, if you disagree with the court, you're open to call the verdict itself bizarre too. The choice is the reader's with that headline.

Best wishes
Kian

Commenting is closed for this article.