VERY IMPORTANT POINTS
1. The Director, CBI, being the head of the agency, should be the person accountable for the entire functioning of the CBI and in that capacity answerable and accountable to the Court for a proper investigation into the alleged crimes.
2. In case of any difference of opinion between the officers of the CBI in relation to the implication of any individual in the crimes or any other matter relating to the investigation, the final decision in the matter would not be taken by the Director, CBI himself or by him merely on the opinion of the Legal Department of the CBI; and in such a situation the matter would be determined according to the opinion of the Attorney General of India.

Headnote:(i) Central Bureau of Investigation -Duties and Powers-CBI with its Director is duty bound to make a fair, honest and complete investigations into the accusations-Ultimate responsibility to ensure a fair, honest and complete investigation is that of the Director-The Director, CBI should continue to remain the person ultimately responsible for proper conduct of investigation and its early completion-The Director, being Head of agency, should be the person accountable for entire functioning of CBI-Every officer of CBI associated with the investigation has to function as a member of a cohesive team-In case of any difference of opinion between officers of CBI, the final decision would not be taken by Director, CBI himself or by him merely on opinion of Legal Department of CBI-Matter would be determined according to opinion of Attorney General of India.
       Held : It is not only appropriate but necessary that the Director, CBI should continue to remain the person ultimately responsible for proper conduct of the investigation and its early completion. The Director, being the Head of the agency, should be the person accountable for the entire functioning of the CBI and in that capacity answerable and accountable to the Court for a proper investigation into the alleged crimes. (Para 9)
       Held that every officer of the CBI associated with the investigation has to function as a member of a cohesive team which is engaged in the common pursuit of a fair, honest and complete investigation into the crimes alleged. It is needless to further emphasise that the exercise has to be performed objectively and fairly, mindful of the fact that the majesty of law has to be upheld and the rule of law preserved, which does not discriminate between individuals on the basis of their status, position or power. The law treats everyone as equal before it and this has to be kept in view constantly in every State action to avoid violation of the right to equality guaranteed in Article 14 of the Constitution. (Para 11)
       Further held that in case of any difference of opinion between the officers of the CBI in relation to the implication of any individual in the crimes or any other matter relating to the investigation, the final decision in the matter would not be taken by the Director, CBI himself or by him merely on the opinion of the Legal Department of the CBI; and in such a situation, the matter would be determined according to the opinion of the Attorney General of India for the purpose of the investigation and filing of the charge-sheet against any such individual. In that event, the opinion would be sought from the Attorney General after making available to him all the opinions expressed on the subject by the persons associated with the investigation as a part of the materials. (Para 13)
       (ii) ANIMAL HUSBANDRY (FODDER SCAM) CASE-Writ petitions filed in Patna High Court alleging large scale misappropriation of public funds by indulging into fraudulent transactions and falsification of accounts-Investigation entrusted to CBI-High Court directed completion of investigation within a period of four months-Application for extension of time-Division Bench observed that Director of CBI was trying to interfere with investigation-Order of exclusion of Director, CBI from participation in investigation-Appeals against-Whether High Court was empowered to make this observation about the Director, CBI while disposing of application for extension of time ?-(Yes)-Order of High Court modified-Care must be taken by High Court to avoid making any observation which may be construed as expression of its opinion on merits against any individual.
       Held : The jurisdiction of the High Court in the matter is to be determined with reference to the direction of this Court contained in the order dated March 19, 1996 which requires the High Court to ensure that a fair, honest and complete investigation is made into the accusations and all persons against whom a prima facie case for trial is made out are identified and put up for trial in accordance with law. It is, therefore, not correct to suggest that the jurisdiction of the High Court while hearing the matter on the application for extension of time to complete the investigation is limited only to the question of time to be granted and does not extend also to examine the manner in which the investigation is being conducted. (Para 8)
       Further held : It does appear that the directions given by the Director, CBI which led to presentation of an incomplete picture of the material collected during the investigation upto that stage before the Division Bench hearing the matter gave rise to the impression in the Division Bench that the Director, CBI was withholding some material information from the High Court. The proper course for the Director, CBI was to ensure that the High Court was informed at the hearing that the CBI report presented to it was incomplete as it did not deal with some additional material which was till then under scrutiny by the agency. If this care had been taken by the Director while issuing instructions regarding production of the CBI report to the High Court at the hearing, the impression created in the High Court that the Director, CBI was attempting to withhold some material information from the High Court or to interfere with the investigation, could have been avoided. We also find that the first FAX message of 2.10.1996 sent from the Head Quarter at New Delhi does appear to be a complete message and a part thereof gives the impression of a direction to withhold some material from the Court. It is unnecessary to go into the reasons which led to this situation because of the lack of proper care of the agency in presenting the full upto date picture before the High Court. It is sufficient to observe that care should be taken hereafter by the Director, CBI to ensure that the officers of the CBI work in unison and as a cohesive team and the High Court is kept fully apprised of all the relevant facts to enable it to perform its task in the manner required by this Court s order dated March 19, 1996. It is needless to add that the High Court also would taken the necessary precaution of requiring the production of all the relevant material before setting out any concluded opinion on any aspect of the investigation, including its fairness. (Para 10)

ORDER

Leave granted.

2. These appeals by special leave are against the order dated 7.10.1996 passed by the Patna High Court in CWJC No. 1617 of 1996 and CWJC No. 602 of 1996. The material facts leading to these appeals, in brief, are stated hereafter.

3. Writ Petitions numbered as CWJC Nos. 1617 of 1996 and 602 of 1996 were filed in the Patna High Court alleging large-scale misappropriation of public funds to the extent of several hundred crores of rupees by indulging into fraudulent transactions and falsification of accounts in the Animal Husbandry Department in the State of Bihar over a long period between the years 1977-78 to 1995-96 which has come to be known as Fodder Scam . An in-depth investigation into the Fodder Scam was called for. The High Court by an order dated 11.3.1996 directed the investigation to be entrusted to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and further directed as under :

".....I would accordingly direct the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) through its Director to enquire and scrutinise all cases of excess drawals and expenditure in the Deptt. of Animal Husbandry in the State of Bihar during 1977-78 to 1995-96 and lodge cases where the drawals are found to be fraudulent in character and take the investigation in those cases to its logical end as early as possible, preferably, within four months."

4. Aggrieved by this order of the High Court, Civil Appeal Nos. 5177 of 1996 and 5178-83 of 1996 were filed by special leave in this Court. This Court disposed of these appeals by order dated March 19, 1996, directing as under :

"We are also of the opinion that, to alleviate the apprehensions of the State about the control of the investigation by the CBI, it should be under the goverall control and supervision of the Chief Justice of the Patna High Court. The CBI officers entrusted with the investigation shall, apart from the concerned criminal court, inform the Chief Justice of the Patna High Court from time to time of the progress made in the investigation and may, if they need any directions in the matter of conducting the Investigation, obtain them from him. The learned Chief Justice may either post the matter for directions before a Bench presided over by him or constitute any other appropriate Bench. After the investigation is over and reports are finalised, as indicated by the Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned judgment, expeditious follow-up action shall be taken. The High Court and the State Government shall co-operate in assigning adequate number of special judges to deal with the cases expeditiously so that no evidence may be lost.

The order of the Division Bench of the High Court in paragraph 54, to the effect that investigation by the State police in cases already instituted shall remain suspended, is modified. The entire investigation now stands entrusted to the CBI as aforesaid. The CBI is directed to take over the investigation already made by the State police, inclusive of the FIRs, arrests and attachments aforementioned and deal appropriately therewith.

(Emphasis supplied)

(State of Bihar & Anr. v. Ranchi Zila Samta Party & Anr., 1996(3) SCC 682 at 684-685.)

5. Pursuant to the above order of this Court the CBI has been reporting the progress of the investigation to the Chief Justice of the Patna High Court. The Joint Director of the CBI, Dr. U.N. Biswas, submitted a report of the investigation carried out by him to the Chief Justice of the High Court on 3.10.1996 and also made an application for extension of time since the High Court had directed completion of the investigation preferably within a period of four months in its order dated 11.3.1996. This application for extension of time was listed for hearing before a Division Bench of the High Court (Coram : S.N. Jha, and S.J. Mukhopadhaya, JJ.) on 4.10.1996 according to the order of the Chief Justice of the High Court. The Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned order dated 7.10.1996 observed that the Director of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document