Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2018 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (3) TMI 1813 - HC - Indian LawsDoctrine of separation of powers - scope of judicial review - offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Scheduled offences - Whether a Court can interfere with the Executive's choice of Investigating Agency in Criminal Investigation? HELD THAT:- We have carefully examined the original file of the Home Ministry, placed for our perusal in sealed covers by the learned Additional Solicitor General. The proceedings recorded therein, clearly indicate that the Home Ministry had received information that, one of the accused was a senior leader of 'Popular Front of India'. The Home Ministry sought information from the State Government. The State Government did not send any report. However, in the meanwhile, the Commissioner of Police, conveyed to the NIA that offences under UA Act were included, after obtaining permission from the Jurisdictional Magistrate. In the circumstances, the Home Ministry have passed the order, directing investigation by the NIA. We may record that, the matter was considered at various levels of the Home Ministry and finally placed for consideration of the Minister of State (Home), as also the Union Home Minister. A careful and harmonious reading of the Statement of Objections filed by the Central Government in juxtaposition with the file notings, leads to an inference that, though the State Government had not sent any report to the Central Government, the communication sent by the Commissioner of Police, was on the file of the Home Ministry and the same was considered. We may further record that, the Home Ministry's notings clearly refers to the communication sent by the Commissioner of Police. In the circumstances, we find no error in Central Government invoking suo motu power. As a corollary, the view taken by the Hon'ble Single Judge, amounts to substitution of Executive's opinion and therefore, not sustainable. It is also fairly well-settled that, doctrine of separation of power does not permit transgression of jurisdictions between the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. We may hasten to add that, the Executive's decision may be called in question seeking judicial review. But judicial review is permissible strictly within well-defined parameters. Thus, the Writ Petitions were filed invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India and they were adjudicated as such - these Writ Appeals are maintainable - appeal allowed.
|