Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SUNEET KUMAR, SYED WAIZ MIAN, JJ.
Pramod Chandra Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.1294 of 2020, 5148 of 2021, 622, 7160, 8758 of 2022, Transfer Application (Criminal) No. -239 of 2020
Decided on : 09-12-2022
Constitution of India, 1949 – Article 14, 20 and 21 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Section 3, 4, 5, 13 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 154, 173, 300, 227, 228 –Information in cognizable cases –Discharge –Framing of charge – Learned counsels for petitioners learned Senior Advocate assisted learned counsel learned State counsel appearing on behalf of Directorate of Enforcement – Held, Court held that an accused cannot ask to change an investigating agency or to require that an investigation be done in a particular manner including asking for a court-monitored investigation – Case has charge-sheeted public servants private persons and companies for offences under PC Act including, conspiracy – Special Judge CBI court would have jurisdiction of trial over private persons company for offences under PC Act and for non PC offences – Exclusive jurisdiction that when trying any case relating to offences may also try any offence other than offence specified with which accused may IPC be charged at same trial – FIR was re-registered by CBI – It is due to pendency of present writ petitions raising challenge to FIR jurisdiction of CBI court – Trial of case in respect of some of accused was pending before court at Meerut – Trial for all these reasons got delayed accused are entitled to speedy trial and more so fair trial – Writ petition is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Suneet Kumar, J.
1. Heard Shri Manish Gupta, assisted by Shri Abhishek Tripathi, Shri Shiv Sagar Singh, learned counsels for the petitioners, Shri Gyan Prakash, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Sanjay Yadav, learned counsel for C.B.I, Ms. Manju Thakur, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Jitendra Prasad Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Directorate of Enforcement.
2. Reliefs pressed by the petitioners/CBI:
(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the FIR bearing no. RC1202019A0008 dated 24.12.2019 registered by Central Bureau of Investigation, Ghaziabad, U/s 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(1)(2) of PC Act, 1988 in pursuance of the Gazette Notification bearing no. 228/35/2018-AVD-II dated 24.10.2019 issued by DOPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pensions, Government of India for further investigation being violative of Article 14, 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
(ii) Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 622 of 2022
(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for setting aside and/or to quash the FIR bearing no. RC1202019A0008 dated 24.12.2019 registered by Central Bureau of Investigation, U/s 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC r/w Section 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) and Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in pursuance of the Gazette Notification bearing no. 228/35/2018-AVD-II dated 24.10.2019 issued by DOPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pensions, Government of India for further investigation having identical allegations in FIR bearing no. 421/2018 dated 03.06.2018 registered by P.S. Kasna, Gautam Budh Nagar, u/s 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC r/w Section 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) and Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in which cognizance was taken, charges were framed and trial was going on before the Ld. Trial Court, Anti Corruption, Meerut in which cognizance was taken, charges were framed and trial was going on before the Ld. Trial Court, Anti Corruption, Meerut as the said second FIR is not maintainable on identical allegations in the eyes of law in which cognizance is taken, charges are framed as the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in “T.T. Antony vs. State of Kerala and others” (2001) 6 SCC 181 dated 12.07.2001 and “Arnab Manoranjan Goswami vs. State of Maharashtra” (2021) 2 SCC 427 dated 27.11.2020; and/or
(iii) Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7160 of 2022
(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside and/or to quash the ECIR bearing no. ECIR/03/LKZO/2020/242 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement arising out of the FIR bearing no. RC1202019A0008 dated 24.12.2019 registered by Central Bureau of Investigation, U/s 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC r/w Section 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; and
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside and/or to quash Summon dated 29.04.2022 bearing No. PMLA/SUMMON/LKZO/2022/516 issued by the office of Directorate of Enforcement to the Applicant/petitioner in the aforesaid ECIR bearing no. ECIR/03/LKZO/2020/242 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement arising out of the FIR bearing no. RC1202019A0008 dated 24.12.2019 registered by Central Bureau of Investigation, U/s 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 PC r/w Section 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; and
(c) Issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus summoning all the record of the instant ECIR bearing no. ECIR/03/LKZO/2020/242 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement arising out of the FIR bearing no. RC1202019A0008 dated 24.12.2019 registered by Central Bureau of Investigation, U/s 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC r/w Section 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
(d) Issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent ED not t
SupremeToday
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the CBI's jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute cases under the PC Act is contingent upon the State's consent and the existence of a de....
It is no more res integra that exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a criminal proceeding is only when an allegation made in the FIR or the charge-sheet constitutes the ingredients of....
Point of law : There is no more res integra that exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC to quash a criminal proceeding is only when an allegation made in the FIR or the charge-sheet constitutes the....
The court can direct a CBI investigation when local investigations are compromised, ensuring fairness and justice in legal proceedings.
The power to transfer a case to the C.B.I. should be exercised rarely in exceptional circumstances, and there must be a lack of confidence in the investigating agency or a national interest at stake.
Judicial interference in investigations is unwarranted without substantial evidence of bias or procedural impropriety, reaffirming the integrity of investigative processes.
Victim has a fundamental right of fair investigation and fair trial – Mere filing of charge-sheet and framing of charges cannot be an impediment in ordering further investigation/re-investigation/de ....
Criminal Law - Transfer of investigation - Not rarest of rare case - Investigation to be conducted officer above rank of A.C.P.
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
