IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Sanjeev Kumar, J.
Major General (Retd.) V.K.Sharma, VSM Son of Shri Vishwa Mitter Sharma - Appellant
Vs.
Central Bureau of Investigation, Rail Head Complex, Jammu Through Superintendent of Police - Respondent
CRMC No.248 of 2016, CrlM No.1851 of 2923 & 314/2019, IA No.1 of 2016
Decided On : 07-02-2024
DSPE Act - Jurisdiction of CBI - Sections 5(1)(e) of the Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Corruption Act, Svt. 2006 - Section 109-B RPC - Sections 2, 3, 5, 6 of the DSPE Act - The court discussed the applicability of the general consent given by the erstwhile Government of Jammu & Kashmir for investigation of offences punishable under the Jammu & Kashmir State Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006 and its relevance for authorizing DSPE/CBI to investigate an offence under Section 5(1)(e) of the 2006 Act, which came to be incorporated in the year 1983 by Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Corruption(Amendment) Act, 1983.
Fact of the Case:
The accused challenged the presentation of criminal challan before the trial Court on the ground that CBI has no jurisdiction to investigate the offence under Section 5(1)(e) of the 2006 Act unless a prior consent of the State Government is obtained by the CBI.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the general consent given by the Government of Jammu & Kashmir for investigation of offences punishable under the 2006 Act holds good for authorizing DSPE/CBI to investigate an offence under Section 5(1)(e) of the 2006 Act, even if it was incorporated by an amendment made subsequent to the issuance of the consent.
Issues: The main issue was whether the general consent given by the erstwhile Government of Jammu & Kashmir for investigation of offences punishable under the 2006 Act is applicable and holds good for authorizing DSPE/CBI to investigate an offence under Section 5(1)(e) of the 2006 Act, which came to be incorporated in the year 1983 by Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Corruption(Amendment) Act, 1983.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the general consent dated 07.05.1958 and held that once consent is given by the State Government for investigation of offences punishable under the 2006 Act by the CBI in the territory of Jammu & Kashmir, such consent will hold good for any amendment carried in the 2006 Act and for the new offence(s) created by such amendment(s).
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed and the interim direction, if any, was vacated.
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioners in this petition are the accused facing trial in a criminal case titled Central Bureau of Investigation vs. V.K.Sharma and another before the Court of learned Special Judge Anti-corruption (CBI Cases), Jammu [“the trial Court”] arising out of FIR No.RC0042014A0001 under Section 5(1)(e) of the Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Corruption Act, Svt. 2006 [“2006 Act”] read with Section 109-B RPC. They are aggrieved of and have challenged the presentation of criminal challan before the trial Court on the ground that Central Bureau of Investigation [“CBI”], a special police establishment constituted under Section 2 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 [“DSPE Act”] has no jurisdiction to investigate the offence under Section 5(1)(e) of the 2006 Act unless a prior consent of the State Government in terms of Section 6 is obtained by the CBI. Reliance is placed on Sections 3, 5 and 6 of the DSPE Act to support this contention.
2. Per contra, the stand of the CBI and the State respondent is that there is general consent given by the State Government in terms of Section 6 for investigation of the offences punishable under the Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006. Reliance is placed by the respondent on a communication of the Government of Jammu & Kashmir bearing No.S-253/57-PD dated 07.05.1958. The respondents submit that since there is general consent given by the State for investigation of offences punishable under the 2006 Act, as such, no fresh consent is required to be given by the State Government for investigating an offence which may have been incorporated in the 2006 Act by an amendment made subsequent to the issuance of communication dated 07.05.1958.
3. Having heard learned counsel for both sides and perused the material on record, following short but interesting question arises for adjudication:-
4. Before adverting to the rival contentions, it would be appropriate to set out Sections 2, 3, 5 and 6 of the DSPE Act, which read thus:-
(2) Subject to any orders which the Central Government may make in this behalf, members of the said police establishment shall have throughout any Union territory, in relation to the investigation of such offences and arrest of persons concerned in such offences, all the powers, duties, privileges and liabilities which police officers of that Union territory have in connection with the investigation of offences committed therein.
(3) Any member of the said police establishment of or above the rank of Sub-Inspector may, subject to any orders which the Central Government may make in this behalf, exercise in any Union territory any of the powers of the officer in charge of a police station in the area in which he is for the time being and when so exercising such powers shall, subject to any such orders as aforesaid, be deemed to be an officer in charge of a police station discharging functions of such an officer within the limits of his station.
3. Offences to be investigated by special police establishment.—The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify the offences or classes of offences, which are to be investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establis
The general consent given by the State Government for investigation of offences punishable under a specific act holds good for authorizing the investigative agency to investigate subsequent amendment....
The erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir has accorded general consent under Section 6 of the DSPE Act for the exercise of jurisdiction by the CBI to investigate certain offences in the State of Jammu....
Jurisdiction of Central Bureau of Investigation to investigate offences – Consent of State Government can be accorded at any stage, even when extension of jurisdiction of CBI to the State is still un....
CBI investigation – Govt. orders according general consent to exercise powers and jurisdiction under DSPE Act against private persons for alleged offences whether acting separately or in conjunction ....
The CBI does not require State consent for jurisdiction when the conspiracy is initiated outside the State, as established under Sections 5 and 6 of the DSPE Act.
State consent under DSPE Act prior to FIR registration validates CBI investigation despite earlier preliminary verification; no quashing of proceedings post charge-sheet and cognizance absent miscarr....
Lack of sanction for prosecution is not always fatal to case of prosecution.
The court clarified that the CBI had jurisdiction to investigate the case without specific consent under Section 6 of the DSPE Act and that the lack of specific consent did not result in a miscarriag....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.