IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Vivek Kumar Birla, Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, JJ.
Smt. Kalpana Maheshwari – Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Criminal misc. Writ petition No. - 9932 of 2024
Decided On : 21-09-2024
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 188 - Investigation of offences committed outside India - Petition for transfer of investigation of FIR under Section 304-B IPC to CBI - Court held that CBI is the nodal agency for such investigations as per notification dated 27.5.2016 - No requirement for State Government's consent under Section 6 of DSPE Act for offences committed outside India - CBI directed to complete necessary formalities for investigation within 15 days. (Paras 7, 15, 19)
(B) Jurisdiction - CBI's role as nodal agency - The court emphasized that CBI must initiate proceedings for obtaining sanction for prosecution from the Ministry of Home Affairs under Section 188 Cr.P.C. (Paras 10, 12)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to transfer the investigation of her daughter's death in the U.S. to CBI, alleging dowry death against her husband. The FIR was lodged after the incident, and the petitioner claimed that the investigation was necessary due to the circumstances of the death occurring outside India.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the CBI is responsible for investigating offences committed outside India and that the State Government's consent is not required for such investigations under Section 188 Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issues were whether the CBI could investigate the case without State Government consent and the procedural requirements for such investigations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the CBI is the designated authority for investigating offences committed outside India and that the State Government's consent is not a prerequisite for such investigations under Section 188 Cr.P.C.
Result: Petition allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Short counter affidavit filed today by the Union of India is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri J.K. Pandey and Ms. Nimisha Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ratan Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State respondents, Sri Gyan Prakash, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.) and Sri Manu Vardhana, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India.
3. Fact giving rise to the present petition is that the daughter of the petitioner Anshu Maheshwari had married to Sumit Binani on 27.11.2020. Thereafter, both of them shifted to United States of America (U.S.A.), where the daughter of the petitioner died in a blast in the house at Seattle U.S. and when the petitioner came to know about the same she lodged a first information report dated 28.9.2023 at Police Station Medical College, District Meerut, U.P. making allegations of dowry death against the accused-Sumit Binani and copy of this first information report was sent to Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi. The petitioner also made a complaint to C.B.I. on 2.6.2022 about the aforesaid incident. Thereafter, on 15.10.2023 office of Senior Superintendent of Police, Meerut has submitted a report to Inspector General of Police, Meerut Zone, Meerut recommending the case to be investigated by the C.B.I. as the offence has been committed outside India and finally matter was referred to C.B.I. by the police authorities of U.P. When no action was taken by the C.B.I. to conduct investigation under Section 188 Cr.P.C. regarding death of daughter of the petitioner, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing present petition with the following prayers:-
b) Issue any other orders or directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
4. On 21.8.2024 following order was passed:-
2. The present petition has been filed with the prayer to transfer investigation of FIR No. 0383/2023 dated 28.9.2023 under section 304-B IPC registered at Police Station Medical College to Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as 'CBI').
3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.
4. It is an admitted fact that death of Anshu, daughter of the petitioner has taken place in United States of America (U.S.A.) within 15 months of her marriage. It is pointed out that in view of the provisions of section 188 Cr.P.C., the investigation has to be conducted by CBI.
5. Attention was drawn towards Annexure 16 to the petition to submit that vide notification dated 27.5.2016 issued by Govt. of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions (Department of Personnel & Training), New Delhi to the effect that investigation and prosecution of offence committed outside territorial jurisdiction of India be investigated by CBI being the nodal agency for the purposes of sanction for prosecution under section 188 Cr.P.C. Attention was further drawn towards Annexure 10 to the petition which is a letter written by Senior Superintendent of Police, Meerut to the Inspector General, Meerut recommending the case to be investigated by the CBI.
6. Attention was also drawn to Annexure 12 to the petition which is a letter dated 05.9.2023 written by Special Secretary, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh to Deputy Secretary, CPB Division, Ministry of Foreign Af
CBI is the nodal agency for investigating offences committed outside India under Section 188 Cr.P.C., and State Government consent is not required for such investigations.
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....
The court can direct a CBI investigation when local investigations are compromised, ensuring fairness and justice in legal proceedings.
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....
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....
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 ....
Lack of sanction for prosecution is not always fatal to case of prosecution.
It is trite law that Article 21 embraces both the life and liberty of the accused as well as the interest of the victim, his or her near and dear ones, as well as of the community at large.
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....
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....
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.