Supreme Court Rules CBI Does Not Require State Permission to File FIR Against Central Employees
The Supreme Court, on December 2, clarified that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) does not need permission from state governments to register a First Information Report (FIR) against central government employees under central laws, even if those employees are working within a specific state.
Case Details: FIRs in Andhra Pradesh
The ruling came in a case involving two central government employees in Andhra Pradesh, accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act). The employees challenged the FIRs in the Andhra Pradesh High Court, arguing that after the state’s bifurcation, the general consent granted to the CBI under the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act, 1946, by the undivided Andhra Pradesh no longer applied. They claimed that fresh consent was required from the newly formed Andhra Pradesh state. The High Court agreed and quashed the FIRs, prompting the CBI to appeal the decision in the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Overturns High Court Ruling
A bench of Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal overturned the High Court’s decision, holding that the general consent given by the undivided Andhra Pradesh in 1990, and extended through subsequent orders, was still valid. The Court emphasized that the alleged offenses were under central legislation and involved central government employees, making state consent unnecessary.
The Court framed the issue as follows:
“Does the CBI require state government consent to register an FIR under a central law merely because the accused works within the state’s territory?”
Answering this, the Court ruled that the High Court had misinterpreted the DSPE Act, 1946, and that state consent was not required in such cases.
Key Precedents Referenced
The Supreme Court referred to earlier rulings, including:
- Kanwal Tanuj v. State of Bihar (2020): This judgment clarified that CBI consent is not necessary for investigating specified offenses within Union Territories, even if part of the offense involves another state or its employees.
- Fertico Marketing and Investment Pvt. Ltd. (2020): The Court held that general consent granted under the DSPE Act allows the CBI to investigate offenses that transcend state boundaries without requiring specific state approval.
Role of CBI in Investigating Central Employees
The Court also cited the 1963 Ministry of Home Affairs resolution, which established the CBI’s authority to investigate cases involving public servants under the Central Government. This resolution reinforces the CBI’s mandate to handle corruption and other serious offenses involving central employees, even if state employees or private individuals are also implicated.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s ruling reaffirms the CBI’s authority to act under central laws without needing state consent, streamlining the process for investigating offenses involving central government employees. This decision strengthens the agency’s ability to address corruption and other crimes under its jurisdiction.
