1 , 2001 ALLMR(Cri)783 (SC), 2001 (1 )ALT(Cri)170 , I (2001 )CCR165 (SC ), 2001 CriLJ968 , 2001 GLH(2 )370 , (2001 )1 GLR907 , JT2001 (1 )SC 624 , 2001 (1 )KLT563 (SC ), RLW2001 (1 )SC 114 , 2001 (1 )SCALE250 , (2001 )3 SCC333 , [2001 ]1 SCR472 , 2001 (1 )UC350 , 2001 (1 )UJ441 , ,MANU/SC/0042/2001K.T. Thomas#R.P. Sethi#2129SC2130Judgment/OrderAIR#ALD(Cri)#Allahabad Criminal Cases#ALLMR(Cri)#ALT (Criminal)#CCR#CriLJ#GLH#Gujarat Law Reporter#JT#KLT#MANU#RLW#SCALE#SCC#SCR#UC#UJK.T. Thomas,SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2012-9-2462831,16581,16582,16632,16618,16392,16429,62830,17163,16939,17067 -->

MANU/SC/0042/2001

True Court CopyTM EnglishUC

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Appeal (crl.) 1163-66 of 1998, Appeal (crl.) 1162 of 1998, Appeal (crl.) 42 of 2001

Decided On: 19.01.2001

Appellants: Central Bureau of Investigation through S.P., Jaipur Vs. Respondent: State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
K.T. Thomas and Mr. R.P. Sethi

JUDGMENT

K.T. Thomas, J.

1. Has a magistrate power to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation to conduct investigation into any offence? This question, seemingly ingenuous, has become compounded with divergent verdicts pronounced by different High Courts. When the High Courts of Rajasthan and Delhi answered the question in the affirmative, the High Courts of Gujarat and Karnataka have answered it in the negative. These appeals are filed at the instance of the Central Bureau of Investigation (for short `CBI') in challenge of the judgments of the High Courts of Rajasthan and Delhi by which the orders passed by certain magistrates were upheld.

2. It is not necessary to narrate the facts in each case. The common feature in all the appeals is, when a complaint was filed before a magistrate alleging serious offences, he ordered investigation to be conducted by the CBI and on completion of the investigation final report was required to be filed. We may now mention what happened thereafter to one of the cases before us. The CBI challenged the order of the magistrate before the High Court of Delhi contending that the magistrate has no jurisdiction to order the CBI to conduct the investigation, at least without obtaining consent of the State Government concerned as required under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, (`Delhi Act' for short). The CBI sought support for the said contention from some of the earlier decisions rendered by single judges of the Delhi High Court. When the matter was placed before a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, a contrary view was taken and the Bench held that the magistrate has the power to do so. The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, in reaching the said view, has mainly relied on the observations made by this Court in State of West Bengal & ors. Sampat Lal & ors. MANU/SC/0126/1984. Learned Judges highlighted the following observation contained in Sampatlal:

"In our considered opinion, Section