Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 8432
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
B. Pugalendhi, J
The Superintendent of Police – Appellant
Versus
IDBI BANK LIMITED – Respondent
WMPCrl(MD)No.129 of 2026|WP(MD)No.5269 of 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: C. Muthu Saravanan
For the Respondents: V. Nagendran, P. Kottaichamy
An investigative agency is duty-bound to register a criminal case and proceed according to law if a preliminary enquiry reveals the commission of an offence, without requiring a specific court direction to do so.
Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ miscellaneous petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking clarification of a previous order. The petitioner agency had conducted a preliminary enquiry into a procurement scam and sought explicit judicial direction to register a formal criminal case, asserting that the previous order did not specifically mandate such registration. The court found that the agency is already mandated by its own internal regulations and legal duties to proceed when an offence is revealed. The central issue was whether a specific court direction is necessary for an investigative agency to register a criminal case following a preliminary enquiry that reveals the commission of an offence. The court reasoned that "Once a preliminary enquiry is conducted and the preliminary enquiry also revealed the commission of offence, it is the duty of the CBI to proceed further by registering the criminal case and to proceed in accordance with law." Therefore, this petition is closed as no clarification is required to the order dated 24.02.2025.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. request for judicial clarification on the necessity of a court order to register a criminal case after a preliminary enquiry reveals a scam. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. the inherent duty of an investigative agency to register a case and proceed legally upon finding evidence of an offence during preliminary enquiry. (Para 4 , 5) |
Writ Miscellaneous Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to clarify the order dated 24.02.2025 in WP(MD)No.1443 of 2025.
ORDER
The petitioner / Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has filed this petition seeking clarification on the order dated 24.02.2025 passed by this court in WP(MD)No.1443 of 2025.
2.This court by order dated 24.02.2025 disposed of the above writ petition as under:
“6. This petition is disposed with the direction to this petitioner-bank to furnish all the details as required by the Respondent CBI within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The respondent CBI shall also find out the manner in which the complaint was lodged and if any particulars have been intentionally suppressed take action against the concerned officers who have concealed the materials before the CBI intentionally. No costs.”
3.The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the petitioner submits that the CBI has registered preliminary enquiry, collected materials and also found a large scale of scam committed in the procurement of doordhal and therefore, they have to proceed further with the case. However, there is no specific direction in the order dated 24.02.2026 for registering the case consequent to the preliminary enquiry. Therefore, they are not in a position to register the criminal case.
4.Heard the learned counsel on either side.
5.Once a preliminary enquiry is conducted and the preliminary enquiry also revealed the commission of offence, it is the duty of the CBI to proceed further by registering the criminal case and to proceed in accordance with law. The petitioner CBI is mandated by its own act to register a criminal case based on the available materials collected during the preliminary enquiry and proceed in accordance with law. Therefore, this petition is closed as no clarification is required to the order dated 24.02.2025.
