The CBI is the premier investigating agency of the country. It figures in the Union List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. It is listed at Serial No. 8 of the List as “Central Bureau of Intelligence and Investigation”
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
New Delhi, the 1st April, 1963
R E S O L U T I O N
The Government of India have had under consideration the establishment of a Central Bureau of Investigation for the investigation of crimes at present handled by the Delhi Special Police Establishment, including specially important cases under the Defence of India Act and Rules particularly of hoarding, black-marketing and profiteering in essential commodities, which may have repercussions and ramifications in several States; the collection of intelligence relating to certain types of crimes; participation in the work of the National Central Bureau connected with the International Criminal Police Organization; the maintenance of crime statistics and dissemination of information relating to crime and criminals; the study of specialized crime of particular interest to the Government of India or crimes having all-India or interstate ramifications or of particular importance from the social point of view; the conduct of Police research,
and the coordination of laws relating to crime. As a first step in that direction, the Government of India have decided to set up with effect from 1st April, 1963 a Central Bureau of Investigation at Delhi with the following six Divisions, namely:-
(i) INVESTIGATION AND ANTI-CORRUPTION DIVISION.
(DELHI SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT).
(ii) TECHNICAL DIVISION.
(iii) CRIME RECORDS AND STATISTICS DIVISON.
(iv) RESEARCH DIVISION.
(v) LEGAL DIVISON & GENERAL DIVISION.
(vi) ADMINISTRATION DIVISION.
The Charter of function of the above-said Divisions will be as given in the Annexure. The assistance of the Central Bureau of Investigation will also be available to the State Police Forces on request for investigating and assisting in the investigation of interstate crime and other difficult criminal cases.
Sd/- (V. VISWANATHAN)
Secretary to the Government of India”
The above resolution was quashed by a Guahati High Court Judgement dt 6.11.2013 in Nabendra Kumar vs UOI
Supreme Court stayed the order on 09.11.2013 in an appeal of Union of India through DoPt vs Nabendrs kumar
The Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 Act No. 25 of 1946
An Act to make provision for the constitution of a special police force in Delhi for the investigation of certain offences in the Union territories, for the superintendence and administration of the said force and for the extension to other of the powers and jurisdiction of members of the said force in regard to the investigation of the said offences.
WHEREAS it is necessary to constitute a special police force in Delhi for the investigation of certain offences in the Union territories and to make provision for the superintendence and administration of the said force and for the extension to other areas of the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the said force in regard to the investigation of the said offences;
It is hereby enacted as follows:—
1. Short title and extent.—
(1)This Act may be called the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946.(2)It extends to the whole of India.
1A. Interpretation section.—
Words and expressions used herein and not defined but defined in the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003, shall have the meanings, respectively, assigned to them in that Act.
2. Constitution and powers of special police establishment.—
(1)Notwithstanding anything in the Police Act, 1861 (5 of 1861), the Central Government may constitute a special police force to be called the Delhi Special Police Establishment for the investigation in any Union territory of offences notified under section 3.
(2)Subject to any orders which the Central Government may make in this behalf, members of the said police establishment shall have throughout any Union territory in relation to the investigation of such offences and arrest of persons concerned in such offences, all the powers, duties, privileges and liabilities which police officers of that Union territory have in connection with the investigation of offences committed therein.
(3)Any member of the said police establishment of or above the rank of Sub-Inspector may, subject to any orders which the Central Government may make in this behalf, exercise in any Union territory any of the powers of the officer in charge of a police station in the area in which he is for the time being and when so exercising such powers shall, subject to any such orders as aforesaid, be deemed to be an officer in charge of a police station discharging the functions of such an officer within the limits of his station.
3. Offences to be investigated by special police establishment.—
The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify the offences or classes of offences which are to be investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment.
4. Superintendence and administration of Special Police Establishment.
(1)The superintendence of the Delhi Special Police Establishment insofar as it relates to investigation of offences alleged to have been committed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988), shall vest in the Commission.
(2)Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (1), the superintendence of the said police establishment in all other matters shall vest in the Central Government.
(3)The administration of the said police establishment shall vest in an officer appointed in this behalf by the Central Government (hereinafter referred to as the Director) who shall exercise in respect of that police establishment such of the powers exercisable by an Inspector-General of Police in respect of the police force in a State as the Central Government may specify in this behalf.
4A. Committee for appointment of Director.—
(1)The Central Government shall appoint the Director on the recommendation of the Committee consisting of —(a)the Prime Minister — Chairperson;(b)the Leader of Opposition recognised as such in the House of the People or where there is no such Leader of Opposition, then, the Leader of the single largest Opposition Party in that House—Member;(c)the Chief Justice of India or Judge of the Supreme Court nominated by him — Member.
(2)No appointment of a Director shall be invalid merely by reason of any vacancy or absence of a Member in the Committee.
(3)The Committee shall recommend a panel of officers—(a)on the basis of seniority, integrity and experience in the investigation of anti-corruption cases; and(b)chosen from amongst officers belonging to the Indian Police Service constituted under the All-India Services Act, 1951 (61 of 1951),for being considered for appointment as the Director.
4B. Terms and conditions of service of Director.—
(1)The Director shall, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the rules relating to his conditions of service, continue to hold office for a period of not less than two years from the date on which he assumes office.
(2)The Director shall not be transferred except with the previous consent of the Committee referred to in sub-section (1) of section 4A.
4BA. Director of Prosecution.—
(1)There shall be a Directorate of Prosecution headed by a Director who shall be an officer not below the rank of Joint Secretary to the Government of India, for conducting prosecution of cases under this Act.
(2)The Director of Prosecution shall function under the overall supervision and control of the Director.
(3)The Central Government shall appoint the Director of Prosecution on the recommendation of the Central Vigilance Commission.
(4)The Director of Prosecution shall notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the rules relating to his conditions of service, continue to hold office for a period of not less than two years from the date on which he assumes office.
Comment– In Vineet Narayan’s case , the Supreme Court has recommended stablishment of an independent directorate of prosecution for the CBI and till such time, a directorate is so established, the Supreme Court has directed that the Attorney General of India shall nominate a panel of advocates to conduct the prosecution.
4C. Appointment for posts of Superintendent of Police and above, extension and curtailment of their tenure, etc.—
(1)The Central Government shall appoint officers to the posts of the level of Superintendent of Police and above except Director, and also recommend the extension or curtailment of the tenure of such officers in the Delhi Special Police Establishment, on the recommendation of a committee consisting of:—
(a)the Central Vigilance Commissioner — Chairperson;(b)Vigilance Commissioners — Members;(c)Secretary to the Government of India in charge of the Ministry of Home — Member;(d)Secretary to the Government of India in charge of the Department of Personnel — Member:
Provided that the Committee shall consult the Director before submitting its recommendation to the Central Government.
(2)On receipt of the recommendation under sub-section (1), the Central Government shall pass such orders as it thinks fit to give effect to the said recommendation.
5. Extension of powers and jurisdiction of special police establishment to other areas.—
(1)The Central Government may by order extend to any area (including Railway areas), in a State, not being a Union territory the powers and jurisdiction of members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment for the investigation of any offences or classes of offences specified in a notification under section 3.
(2)When by an order under sub-section (1) the powers and jurisdiction of members of the said police establishment are extended to any such area, a member thereof may, subject of any orders which the Central Government may make in this behalf, discharge the functions of a police officer in that area and shall, while so discharging such functions, be deemed to be a member of a police force of that area and be vested with the powers, functions and privileges and be subject to the liabilities of a police officer belonging to that police force.
(3)Where any such order under sub-section (1) is made in relation to any area, then, without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (2) any member of the Delhi Special Police Establishment of or above the rank of Sub-Inspector may subject to any orders which the Central Government may make in this behalf, exercise the powers of the officer in charge of a police station in that area and when so exercising such powers, shall be deemed to be an officer in charge of a police station discharging the functions of such an officer within the limits of his station.
6. Consent of State Government to exercise of powers and jurisdiction.
Nothing contained in section 5 shall be deemed to enable any member of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to exercise powers and jurisdiction in any area in a State, not being a Union territory or railway area, without the consent of the Government of that State.
Power of Investigation by CBI
6A. Approval of Central Government to conduct inquiry or investigation.—
(1)The Delhi Special Police Establishment shall not conduct any inquiry or investigation into any offence alleged to have been committed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988) except with the previous approval of the Central Government where such allegation relates to—
(2)Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), no such approval shall be necessary for cases involving arrest of a person on the spot on the charge of accepting or attempting to accept any gratification other than legal remuneration referred to in clause (c) of the Explanation to section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988).
Comment : CBI can Investigate if an offence is alleged to have been committed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with a prior approval of the Central Government and CBI can arrests, with or without warrant as per Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1973.
7. Repeal of Ordinance 22 of 1946.—
FIRST INFORMATION REPORTS [ from the year 2016]
In compliance to the order (dated 07.09.2016) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the Writ Petition No. 68/2016, all FIRs registered in various branches of CBI across India can be accessed at this portal with effect from 15th Nov. 2016.
CBI cases Before Indian Supreme Court
1. Abhay Singh Chautala Vs C.B.I
2. Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah Vs Cbi & Anr
3. C.B.I Vs Sadhu Ram Singla & Ors On 23 February, 2017
4. C.B.I,New Delhi Vs M.N.Sharma
5. C.V.Madan Vs C.B.I.
6. CBI Vs. Maninder Singh
7. Central Bureau Of Investigation Vs Amitbhai Anil Chandra Shah And Anr
8. Central Bureau Of Investigation Vs Duncans Agro Industries
9. Devinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State Of Punjab Through CBI
10. Dipak Subhashchandra Mehta Vs C.B.I & Anr
11. Hemant Dhasmana Vs Central Bureau Of Investigation
12. Jeewan Kumar Raut & Anr Vs C.B.I
13. Mahipal Singh & Others V/S C.B.I. & Others
14. Michael Machado & Anr Vs Central Bureau Of Investigation
15. Natasha Singh Vs Cbi (State)
16. Nikhil Merchant Vs C.B.I. & Anr On 20 August, 2008
17. Nirmal Singh Kahlon Vs State Of Punjab & Ors
18. Nupur Talwar Vs Cbi & Anr
19. P.V. Narasimha Rao Vs State(Cbi/Spe)
20. R.K.PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM
21. Rajat Prasad Vs. C.B.I
22. Rajesh Talwar & Anr Vs Cbi & Anr
23. Ram Narain Popli Vs Central Bureau Of Investigation
24. Ramesh Gelli Vs CBI Of 2016
25. Rubabbuddin Sheikh Vs State Of Gujarat & Ors
26. Sajjan Kumar Vs C.B.I On 20 September, 2010
27. Sanjay Chandra Vs CBI
28. Sanjay Vs. The State Of Maharashtra, Through CBI (STF)
29. SANJIV KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
30. Santosh Kumar Singh Vs State Th. Cbi
31. SPS Rathore Vs. CBI & Ors
32. State Of AP Vs. M. Radhakrishnamurthy
33. State Of Jharkhand Through SP, CBI Vs. Lalu Prasad @ Lalu Prasad(2017)
Delay Condonation-Mere delay in approaching a court of law would not by itself afford a ground for dismissing the case – RELIANCE placed on Japani Sahoo v. Chandra Sekhar Mohanty (2007) 7 SCC 394 in which it has been observed that in serious offences, prosecution is done by the State and the court of law should not throw away prosecution solely on the ground of delay. Sajjan Kumar v. Union of India (2010) 9 SCC 368 to contend that a prosecution should not be quashed merely on the ground of the delay.reliance on the State of Tamil Nadu v. M. Suresh Rajan (2014) 11 SCC 709 is apt in which the time consumed in taking opinion on change of Government was held to be sufficient cause so as to condone the delay. Reliance has also been placed on Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Ors. v. Subrata Borah Chowlek, etc. (2010) 14 SCC 419 in which there was a delay in filing the appeals in which this Court has observed that Section 5 owes no distinction between State and citizen. The Court has to ensure that owing to some delay on part of the machinery, miscarriage of justice should not take place. It is also contended that the power under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should be exercised to advance substantial justice by placing reliance on State of Nagaland v. Lipok AO & Ors. (2005) 3 SCC 752.
34. State Of M.P Through C.B.I., Etc Vs Paltan Mallah, Etc
35. State Of Maharashtra Trhu CBI Vs Vikram Anantrai Doshi & Ors
36. State Of Rajasthan Vs. Hanif Khan
37. State Of U.P. Through C.B.I. … Vs R.K. Srivastava And Another
38. State Rep. By The C.B.I Vs Anil Sharma (1997)
39. State Thorugh C.B.I Vs Mahender Singh Dahiya
40. State Through C.B.I Vs Amaramani Tripathi(2005)
41. Sudevanand Vs State Through Cbi
42. Superintendent Of Police, C.B.I. … Vs Tapan Kr. Singh(2003)
43. Superintendent Of Police, CBI/SIT Vs Nalini And 25 Others
44. Suresh Nanda Vs. C.B.I.
45. Union Of India Thr. Inspector, Cbi Vs Purnandu Biswas
46. V. C. Shukla Vs State Through C.B.I
47. Vineet Narain & Others Vs Union Of India & Another 1997
Read More Judgments
Appeal against discharge of the accused charge sheeted under Prevention of Corruption act
© Advocatetanmoy law library