2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 142303
167 CWP-PIL-279-2026 (O&M) (CNR No: PHHC011665432026)
RAVI RAJ Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Present: Mr. Gaurav Chopra, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Arjun Sheoran, Advocate, Ms. Pranhita Singh, Advocate, Mr. Tejasvi Sheokand, Advocate, and Ms. Heena Kadyan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Addl. Solicitor General of India, with Ms. Shreyanshi Verma, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3/UOI.
Mr. R.S. Bajaj, Advocate for respondent No.9.
Mr. Deepender Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, with Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Special Public Prosecutor, CBI, with Mr. K.J.S. Bhullar, Advocate for the respondents-CBI.
Mr. Aashish Chopra, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Chandandeep Singh, Advocate, Ms. Nitik Sharma, Advocate, and Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.11.
(ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE
(ROHIT KAPOOR)
04.11.2026 JUDGE
167 CWP-PIL-279-2026 (O&M) (CNR No: PHHC011665432026)
RAVI RAJ Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Present: Mr. Gaurav Chopra, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Arjun Sheoran, Advocate, Ms. Pranhita Singh, Advocate, Mr. Tejasvi Sheokand, Advocate, and Ms. Heena Kadyan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Addl. Solicitor General of India, with Ms. Shreyanshi Verma, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3/UOI.
Mr. R.S. Bajaj, Advocate for respondent No.9.
Mr. Deepender Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, with Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Special Public Prosecutor, CBI, with Mr. K.J.S. Bhullar, Advocate for the respondents-CBI.
Mr. Aashish Chopra, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Chandandeep Singh, Advocate, Ms. Nitik Sharma, Advocate, and Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.11.
*****
1. Status reports have been filed by the Punjab police, as per which the investigation in the matter is proceeding. Our attention has been invited to the second status report, wherein it is mentioned that during the course of the investigation, material was prima facie found to indicate applicability of offences under section 66F of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and therefore, such section was also added in the matter.
2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention to the provisions of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (‘the 2008 Act’), which makes reference to scheduled offence under section 2(g) of the 2008 Act. By virtue of the amendment incorporated in Schedule to the 2008 Act, Section 66F of the Information Technology Act, 2000, has been included as a scheduled offence.
3. Learned senior counsel has also placed reliance upon section 6 of the 2008 Act, which reads as under:-
“6. Investigation of Scheduled Offences.- (1) On receipt of information and recording thereof under section 154 of the Code relating to any Scheduled Offence the officer-incharge of the police station shall forward the report to the State Government forthwith.
(2) On receipt of the report under sub-section (1), the State Government shall forward the report to the Central Government as expeditiously as possible.
(3) On receipt of report from the State Government, the Central Government shall determine on the basis of information made available by the State Government or received from other sources, within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the report, whether the offence is a Scheduled Offence or not and also whether, having regard to the gravity of the offence and other relevant factors, it is a fit case to be investigated by the Agency.
(4) Where the Central Government is of the opinion that the offence is a Scheduled Offence and it is a fit case to be investigated by the Agency, it shall direct the Agency to investigate the said offence.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, if the Central Government is of the opinion that a Scheduled Offence has been committed which is required to be investigated under this Act, it may, suo motu, direct the Agency to investigate the said offence.
(6) Where any direction has been given under sub-section (4) or sub- section (5), the State Government and any police officer of the State Government investigating the offence shall not proceed with the investigation and shall forthwith transmit the relevant documents and records to the Agency.
(7) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that till the Agency takes up the investigation of the case, it shall be the duty of the officer-in-charge of the police station to continue the investigation.”
4. Relying upon the above provisions, it is pointed out that on receipt of a report under section 154(1) with regard to commissioning of a scheduled offence, the State Government is required to forward the report to the Central Government as expeditiously as possible. On receipt of such information, the Central Government has to determine as to whether the offence is a scheduled offence or not, and also whet