LexADVOCATES ASSOCIATION,, BANGALORE versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
I ' ' . [2013) 10 S.C.R. 813- ADVOCATES ASSOCIATION,, BANGALORE ·• v. <. - ' .. UNION OF INDIA & ORS .. (Civil Appeal No. 7159 of 2013): "• . • : ' 1. " - •.. . , ..•. AU~usr21,;2013 , ,·• ,. '" •' •' '' •'I' 'I' . I . : . [P. SATHASIVAM, · CJI, RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI AND RANJAN GOGOi, JJ.] A B , Constitution 'of India: 0 1950 - Article ,136 - CBI investigation,.~ Entrusting of :.prayer for :· Tenability -. Scuffle C between. advocates, police .. and media persons and simultaneous violence in the City Civil Court Complex - Lathi charge by police· - Several persons injured - Number of vehicles also damaged and destroyed due to stone pelting arid arson:. Over 191 cases registered,- Writ petitions before D High Court - Special Investigation Team (Sl7) constituted by High Court to investigate into the incident - Direction of Supreme Court modifying the composition of SIT - lnspite of the modified order of Supreme Court, investigation did not commence due to non-fonnation of SIT.- Held: Principles laid E down in a Constitution Bench decision of Supreme Court in regard. to: entrusting of investigation to CBI, and the series of incidents in the instant case, make it clear that CBI inquiry is necessitated in the matter in issue, - CBI directed t'!parry out the investigation and submit a report before the appropriate F Court within six months - State/SIT to immediately hand over all the records pertaining to the investigation to the CBI. : ..... '. ,1·,, • ,/ ,·• On 02.03.2012, when a former Minister in· the Government of Kamataka was sought to be produced by G the CBI, Bangalore, Branch, In .the City. Civil Court Complex, a large crowd gathered in the court premises which caused a great deal of inconvenience, as a result of which, scuffle ensued between advocates, police and 813 H 814 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 10 S.C.R. A media persons and simultaneously violence broke out and the police resorted to lathi charge in which several persons got injured. A number of vehicles were also damaged and destroyed due to stone pelting and arson. Over 191 cases were registered in regard to the above B said incident against the police, advocates, media persons, public etc. under various categories in various police stations of the City. Several writ petitions came to be filed before the C High Court seeking various reliefs inter alia including direction to the State Government to entrust the investigation of the incident to the CBI. Vide order dated 16-5-2012, the High Court con·stituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate into the incident and to conclude the same within 3 months from the date D of the Government Notification. It is the grievance of the appellant-Association before this Court that inspite of the said order of the High Court dated 16-5-2012 and subsequent direction of this Court E dated 19-10-2012 modifying the composition of SIT, investigation had still not commenced even after a lapse of one year and five months from the date of the incident. It was submitted that it was a fit case which the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should investigate and an F outer limit ought to be fixed for the same. Allowing the appeal and accordingly disposing off the connected I.A., the Court HELD: 1. It is unfortunate that even after the order of G this Court dated 19.10.2012 nothing has happened. The constitution of the so-called SIT has not completed till date. tnspite of the modified order of this Court, the investigation is yet to commence due to non-formation H of SIT. [Para 10] [822-B, C] ADVOCATES ASSOCIATION, BANGALORE v. UNION 815 OF INDIA & ORS. 2.1. As regards entrusting the investigation to the A CBI, a Constitution Bench of this Court in Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal has laid down certain principles. It was held therein that a direction by the High Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, to CBI to investigate B a cognizable offence alleged to have been committed within the territory of a State without the consent of that State will neither impinge upon the federal structure of the Constitution nor violate the doctrine of separation of power and shall be valid in law. Being the protectors of C civil liberties of the citizens, the Supreme Court and the High Courts have not only the power and jurisdiction but also an obligation to pr
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.