9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 681X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Singhal, B.V. Balramdas, Pradeep Mishra, T. Mahipal, Suraj Singh, Mhd. Taiyab Khan, Shakil Ahmad Syed, Sanjay R. Hegde, Anil Kr. Mishra, Ashok K. Shrivastava, Saurabh Trivedi, T.V. George, S. Wasim A. Qadri, Vijay Pratap Singh, Anil Kumar Jha, Vijay Panjwani, Santosh Kumar, Kailash Chand, Rakesh K. Khanna, Rashmi Khanna, Jahanvi Warah, Reetesh Singh, Anil Katiyar, Atishi Dipankar, Ajay Kumar Aggarwal, Binu Tamta, Rajiv Tyagi, Ranjan Mozumdar, Chanchal Biswal, V.K. Verma, Pranab Kumar Mullick, K.K. Mohan, Vishwajit Singh, Mridula Ray Bhardwaj, S. Dutta, Advs. and Party-in-Perso JUDGMENT S.B. Sinha, J. 1. Whether this Bench should consider the correctness of an order passed by the Governor of Uttar Pradesh refusing to grant sanction for pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s regards its findings against the erring officers and holders of public posts. A detailed report was submitted by it. A question arose as to what directions, if any, should be issued by this Court having regard to the conflict in opinions expressed by different authorities of CBI in regard to Ms. Mayawati and Mr. Naseemuddin Siddiqui. The said question was considered by this Court in its judgment and order dated 27.11.2006 in M.C. Mehta (Taj Corridor Scam) v. Union of India and Ors. (2007)1SCC110 . 4. Indisputably, the said order of this Court has been complied with. It now appears that the learned Special Judge directed CBI to obtain sanction of the Governor of Uttar Pradesh. By reason of an order dated 03.06.2007 the Governor of Uttar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the concerned court/Special Judge for deciding the matter in accordance with law. (iv) Declaring that the sanction orders passed under Section 197(1) Cr. P.C. are in the public domain and hence cannot be classified as secret. 6. Mr. Mahajan, in support of the said application, would submit that the task of protection of cultural heritage having been undertaken by this Court and keeping in view the provisions of Article 49 of the Constitution of India, the Court should interfere in the matter and set aside the order of the Governor of Uttar Pradesh refusing to accord sanction to prosecute Ms. Mayawati and Mr. Naseemuddin Siddqui, keeping in view the political scenario in the country, as CBI may not show any further interest in the matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o an adversarial litigation. The jurisdiction of the court to issue a writ of continuous mandamus is only to see that proper investigation is carried out. Once the court satisfies itself that a proper investigation has been carried out, it would not venture to take over the functions of the Magistrate or pass any order which would interfere with its judicial functions. Constitutional scheme of this country envisages dispute resolution mechanism by an independent and impartial tribunal. No authority, save and except a superior court in the hierarchy of judiciary, can issue any direction which otherwise take away the discretionary jurisdiction of any court of law. Once a final report has been filed in terms of Sub-section (1) of Section 173 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This Court in its order dated 27.11.2006 upon noticing Vineet Narain (supra) and Union of India v. Prakash P. Hinduja and Anr. 2003CriLJ3117 held: 26. Analysis of the above judgments shows that there is a clear-cut and well-demarcated sphere of activities in the field of crime detection and crime punishment. Investigation of an offence is the field reserved for the executive through the Police Department, the superintendence over which vests in the State Government. The executive is charged with a duty to keep vigilance over the law and order situation. It is obliged to prevent crime. If an offence is committed allegedly, it is the State's duty to investigate into the offence and bring the offender to book. Once it investigates throug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riminal misconduct so as to form an opinion one way or the other so as to prima facie determine guilt of a person or otherwise. Any direction which could be issued, in our opinion, has already been issued by us on 27.11.2006, stating: 34. We, accordingly, direct CBI to place the evidence/material collected by the investigating team along with the report of the SP as required under Section 173(2) CrPC before the court/Special Judge concerned who will decide the matter in accordance with law. It is necessary to add that, in this case, we were concerned with ensuring proper and honest performance of duty by CBI and our above observations and reasons are confined only to that aspect of the case and they should not be understood as our opinion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
