CBI autonomous body, Centre not accountable for it, SC told
Representing the Centre, AG KK Venugopal told the SC bench that CBI operates under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act and that it also derives its authority to register cases under the same law
New Delhi: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is an “autonomous” body, not controlled or regulated by the Union government, attorney general (AG) KK Venugopal submitted before the Supreme Court on Tuesday while seeking dismissal of West Bengal government’s petition for debarring CBI from lodging cases in the state without its consent or prior approval.
Representing the Centre, Venugopal told a bench, headed by justice L Nageswara Rao, that CBI operates under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act (DSPE), and that it also derives its authority to register cases under the same law.
“CBI is constituted under the DSPE Act and its officers have been taking actions under this Act. The Union of India has nothing to do with it... CBI is an autonomous institution operating under a parliamentary law,” the AG said in his bid to emphasise that the central government cannot take accountability or responsibility for what CBI does.
He pointed out that West Bengal government’s suit was asking For all relief only against CBI; its petition pleaded for a restraint on the agency against filing any fresh case without state’s approval as well as annulment of 12 cases registered by CBI.
“All these prayers have nothing to do with the Union of India. The entirety of plaint is on CBI and the Union of India had nothing to do with these cases... Union of India is not a necessary party. CBI is a necessary party. This suit cannot be maintained against the Union of India when all the reliefs claimed are against CBI,” the A-G told the bench, which also included justices BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna.
According to Venugopal, it is the central vigilance commission (CVC) which has been tasked with superintendence over CBI, and the CVC Act makes it clear that there cannot be any interference with the investigations conducted by the agency.
“Even CVC cannot interfere with the manner of investigation. Therefore, registration of cases is by an autonomous body and whatever superintendence is there, that power is with the CVC. Union of India has no control,” said the A-G.
He added that a state is entitled under Article 131 of the Constitution to file a suit in the Supreme Court against another state or the central government but the West Bengal government’s suit is only about CBI.
“Since the suit otherwise would not have been maintainable, the Union of India has been made a party. These reliefs cannot be claimed against the Union of India. How can I grant these reliefs?” asked the AG.
Venugopal said that the suit should be dismissed straightaway for being non-maintainable against the central government.
Opposition parties, including the Congress and TMC, have attacked the Centre for using the federal agencies to target them and using ordinance route to bypass Parliament.
West Bengal is among seven states, that have withdrawn the general consent for the CBI to carry out investigations in their jurisdiction. Other states are Maharashtra, Punjab, Chhattisgarh Rajasthan, Jharkhand and Mizoram. The central agency has to seek permission to carry out investigation in these states on case-to-case basis, as per DSPE (Delhi Special Police Establishment) Act.
The 12 FIRs cited by the state government were filed between November 2018 and June 2021. The cases involve a variety of charges, including corruption, abuse of official position, forgery, criminal breach of trust, death due to rash and negligent driving and criminal misconduct. In some of these cases, employees of Central government establishments have been named as accused.
Appearing for the West Bengal government, senior advocate Sidharth Luthra took exception to the A-G’s submissions, arguing that the central government should not even get an audience from the bench since they have chosen not to file any vakalatnama (formal communication for appearance in the case through a lawyer) or a written submission in response to the suit.
“The Supreme Court rules are clear that they had to file a vakalatnama and a written statement within 28 days. They have done nothing. Today, they don’t have a right to be heard. As per the SC rules, this suit should be allowed right away,” contended Luthra.
Also representing the state government, senior advocate Biswajit Bhattacharya sought to contest Venugopal’s arguments, saying that the very existence of CBI is by an approval of the central government under the DSPE Act, which has a deep and pervasive control over the agency. He added that various provisions in the DSPE Act clarify CBI and the central government were intertwined.
At this, the court asked the central government to comply with the procedure and file its vakalatnama, and fixed the matter for a hearing after three weeks.
In August this year, the Mamata Banerjee government filed the original suit in the Supreme Court to debar CBI from conducting probes in the state without prior approval of the government.
Underlining that the TMC government had in November 2018, withdrawn general consent to carry out a probe in the territory of the state, the suit maintained that registration of 12 cases by the central agency despite withdrawal of consent was an instance of “constitutional overreach” by the Union government.
The state said that CBI has no inherent jurisdiction to conduct a probe in any part of the state, including railway areas, till the time it obtains a prior sanction. Claiming that the agency has been exercising its powers in an “unconstitutional manner”, the suit said the registration of cases by CBI was an encroachment on the legal rights of the state. The plea demanded quashing of all 12 cases registered by CBI and to restrain the agency from lodging any fresh cases.
On September 6, the court directed its registry to issue a formal notice to the Centre on the suit, seeking a reply from the Union government.