The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the maintainability of an original suit filed by West Bengal, which accuses the Centre of “constitutional overreach” and violating federalism by unilaterally employing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) without the State’s prior consent.
A Bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta refused to accept the Union government’s preliminary objection that it was wrongly made a defendant in the suit as it did not control the CBI, which was an “independent agency”. “The very establishment, exercise of powers, extension of jurisdiction, the superintendence of the DSPE [Act], all vest with the Government of India,” Justice Gavai, authoring the verdict, said.
The court reminded the Centre that the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act mandated the State’s prior consent to a CBI probe within its jurisdiction.
The judgment noted that the Union government was “vitally concerned” with the CBI, saying that this was plainly evident from the fact that only offences notified by the Centre could be investigated by the CBI under the DSPE Act, the statute which governs the premier probe agency.
“Under Section 4 of the DSPE Act, except the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the superintendence of the DSPE in all other matters would vest with the Central government,” Justice Gavai noted.
Justice Gavai, however, clarified that these observations were only made to meet the preliminary objections raised by the Union government. They will have no bearing on the merits of the suit.
The Bench set August 13 as the date for hearing framing issues with regard to West Bengal’s suit.
The Centre, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, had earlier contended that the CBI too could not be made a defendant in the suit as the agency was not the ‘Government of India’. Original suits filed directly in the Supreme Court under Article 131 of the Constitution exclusively deal with disputes involving the Union and the States, Mr. Mehta had reasoned.
The law officer had pressed the court to dismiss the West Bengal suit on these preliminary grounds without going into its merits. However, the Bench on Wednesday said the suit raised “serious questions concerning the wider ramifications of federalism”.
West Bengal, represented by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, had made specific contentions that the CBI had acted on the Centre’s directions. West Bengal had withdrawn its general consent to CBI investigations way back on November 16, 2018. Nevertheless, the CBI, with the blessings of the Centre, had gone on to register 12 cases in West Bengal without obtaining the State government’s consent. This had prompted the State to approach the top court with a suit, Mr. Sibal had explained.
Another Bench of the Supreme Court is tackling a similar question of law related to the State of Tamil Nadu in the case of Ankit Tiwari, an Enforcement Directorate officer against whom the Tamil Nadu Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption had launched a criminal prosecution for bribery.