IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Pratik S/o Vinay Kumar Singh - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through Home Secretary - Respondents
W.P. (Cr.) No. 52 of 2026
Decided On : 11-03-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments presented by the petitioners regarding validity of the fir. (Para 20 , 21 , 24 , 26) |
| 2. legal framework concerning custodial issues and police investigation. (Para 28 , 50 , 52) |
| 3. final conclusion directing cbi investigation. (Para 64) |
JUDGMENT
This matter was mentioned on 15.01.2026 and seeing the urgency in the matter, this matter was allowed to be listed on 16.01.2026 and on that day, following order was passed:
“02/16.01.2026 Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel for the State appearing through Video Conferencing.
2. This criminal writ petition was mentioned yesterday by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and seeing the urgency in the matter, the matter was allowed to be listed and that is how, this matter has been listed today.
3. In this criminal writ petition, following prayers have been made:
(i) For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/, direction(s) for quashing the entire criminal proceedings including the FIR being Airport PS Case No. 5 of 2026 dated 13.01.2026, instituted for the alleged offences under Sections 109(2), 117(2), 115(2), 127(2), 351(2), 352, 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which is now pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.
(ii) Or in alternate for issuance of appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) for transferring the investigation of the allegations made in FIR being Airport P.S. Case No. 5 of 2026 to an independent agency such as Central Bureau of Investigation to conduct free and impartial investigation.
(iii) And be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondent Authorities, specifically the Station House Officer, Airport Police Station, to register a First Information Report (F.I.R.) and take appropriate legal action against the informant Santosh Kumar on the basis of the Written Information/Report dated 13.01.2026 submitted by the Petitioner No. 1, which discloses cognizable offences including obstruction of public servant and fabrication of evidence, but has arbitrarily remained unattended by the Police Authorities till date. (iv) During the pendency of this Writ Application be pleased to stay proceedings arising out of Airport P.S.
Case No. 05 of 2026 against the Petitioners.
(v) Any other relief or reliefs as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper for which the petitioner is very much entitled under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.
4. Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that Ranchi Zonal Office of Directorate of Enforcement is presently handling several high-profile and sensitive investigations involving influential political figures and senior bureaucrats, including matters relating to Chief Minister, former Minister and senior I.A.S. officers. These investigations have wide public ramifications and are being conducted under close judicial and public scrutiny. He further submits that in this sensitive and high-stakes environment, the petitioners are discharging their statutory duties strictly in accordance with law. He then submits that petitioner no.1 is Assistant Director and petitioner no.2 is Assistant Enforcement Officer in the office of Directorate of Enforcement, Ranchi Zonal Office posted at Ranchi. He next submits that the informant, namely, Santosh Kumar is the principal accused in a large-scale misappropriation of Government funds amounting to approximately Rs.23 Crores from the Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Government of Jharkhand. He also submits that the ECIR case has been registered against the said Santosh Kumar and he was taken into custody by the police authorities and, thereafter, he has been allowed bail. He further submits that in absence of any summon by the Directorate of Enforcement to the said Santosh Kumar, he suo motu appeared before the office of Directorate of Enfo


State of Rajasthan v. Prakash Chand
Indore Development Authority (Recusal Matter- 5J.) v. Manohar Lal and others
Krishna Swami v. Union of India and others
State of West Bengal and others v. Swapan Kumar Guha and others
Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P.
T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala
State of Karnataka v. T.N. Sudhakar Reddy
Kurukshetra University v. State of Haryana
Union of India v. Prakash P. Hinduja
Satvinder Kaur v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra
Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh
Tomaso Bruno and another v. State of Uttar Pradesh
D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal and others
Munshi Singh Gautam v. State of M.P.
Romila Thapar and others v. Union of India and others
Vinay Aggarwal v. State of Haryana and others
Salib @ Shalu @ Salim v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others
Mahmood Ali & others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others
Khurshid Ahmad Chohan v. Union of Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and others
Court held that state police investigation indicated bias; thus, CBI should investigate to ensure impartiality in serious allegations involving high-profile figures.
The court emphasized the importance of thorough examination of allegations before transferring an investigation to CBI and highlighted the petitioner's failure to register an FIR or seek remedy under....
Criminal Law - Transfer of investigation - Not rarest of rare case - Investigation to be conducted officer above rank of A.C.P.
If a citizen, who is a defacto complainant in a criminal case alleging commission of a cognizable offence affecting violation of his legal or fundamental rights against influential persons, prays bef....
Point of law : Criminal Law – Transfer of investigation - Transfer of investigation to CBI is not a matter of routine, in extraordinary circumstances by using powers of this Court sparingly in except....
The necessity for a C.B.I. investigation arises in cases where police personnel are accused, ensuring fairness and public confidence in the judicial process.
The accused has no right to dictate the investigating agency or method of investigation, and the plea of alibi must be substantiated with cogent evidence.
The court can direct a CBI investigation when local investigations are compromised, ensuring fairness and justice in legal proceedings.
Point of Law : Provisions of section 6 of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 - Officers of Delhi Special Police Establishment, a premier investigating agency, are and must be fully alive to....
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.