Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
Vijay Bishnoi, Kardak Ete
Tania Magria and Anr Son of Tagum Magria – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
Vijay Bishnoi, CJ.
Heard Mr. T. Taba, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. M. Kato, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India and Mr. L. Perme, learned Standing Counsel, Power Department appearing for the respondent Nos.2, 5, 6, 7 & 8.
2. The petitioners have filed this PIL petition praying for an independent investigation monitored by this Court into the alleged embezzlement/organized loot of public money to the tune of Rs.25,15,24,572/- in the name of electrification under the Rajiv Gandhi Gramin Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY) for rural electricity infrastructure and household electrification in Upper Subansiri District of Arunachal Pradesh. The petitioners are also claiming that they are aggrieved with the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities to take appropriate measures for curbing the menace of rampant corruption and to punish the culprits who involved in misappropriation of Government fund to the tune of Rs.25,15,24,572/- under the RGGVY for rural electricity infrastructure and household electrification in Upper Subansiri District of Arunachal Pradesh.
3. The petitioners have claimed that although from the official report, it transpire
Writ courts should not initiate investigations into corruption allegations when statutory remedies are available; petitioners must first approach appropriate authorities.
Statutory remedies must be exhausted before seeking judicial intervention in cases of alleged corruption, emphasizing the role of investigative agencies.
The State's power to direct further investigation post-final report is not absolute and must adhere strictly to procedural norms, reinforcing accountability in public office.
The court ruled that aggrieved parties must seek investigation remedies through the Magistrate under Section 175(3) of the BNSS, 2023, rather than filing writ petitions under Article 226.
Judicial interference in investigations is unwarranted without substantial evidence of bias or procedural impropriety, reaffirming the integrity of investigative processes.
Further investigation – Order directing handing over investigation to any other agency other than police should not be passed in favour of party applying for it as a matter of right or in a routine m....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
