CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANR. versus ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL AND ORS.

Citation: [2007] 3 S.C.R. 1091 · Decided: 15-03-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: AR. LAKSHMANAN · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

) 
f 
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL AND ORS. 
MARCH 15, 2007 
[DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND AL TAMAS KABIR, JJ.] 
B 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 
s.482-Petition before High Court challenging prosecution of 
petitioner-Direction by Supreme Court to decide maintainability of C 
petition-High Court directing Department of Revenue to allow inspection 
of confidential files pertaining to sanction granted for prosecution and 
notings of Finance Minister prior to the prosecution leading evidence in 
trial court-Held, High Court has failed to comply with specific direction 
given by the Court-Impugned order set aside-High Court would take up D 
both the issues of maintainability and validity of sanction for prosecution 
simultaneous(v and decide the same on merits-Respondent will have no 
right to inspection till entire file is perused by High Court and orders issued 
thereupon-Interlocutory orders. 
In a criminal writ petition, the High Court passed an interlocutory order E 
directing inspection of records of the files relating to grant of sanction for 
prosecution of respondent no. 1 prior to the prosecution leading evidence in 
the trial court. Similarly, the High Court allowed the inspection to be made 
of the notings of the Finance Minister, to the accused owing to the fact that 
the same had been adverted to in the affidavit filed on behalf of the Central 
Bureau of Investigation. Aggrieved, the CBI filed the two appeals. 
It was contended for the appellant that despite the specific directions of 
the Supreme Court to hear the matter on maintainability, the High Court 
erred in hearing the matter on merits and directing the Department of 
Revenue to allow inspection of confidential files pertaining to sanction granted 
for prosecution of respondent no. 1. 
Disposing of the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 It is not in dispute that challenges to sanction for prosecution 
and maintainability of the writ petition are pending consideration before the 
1091 
F 
G 
H 
1092 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] 3 S.C.R. 
A High Court. While disposing of Criminal Appeal no. 1308 of2006, this Court 
( 
requested the High Court to consider the question of maintainability of the 
writ petition on the same date itself and also reserved liberty to both the parties 
to approach the Division Bench for other reliefs as well and dispose of the 
criminal appeal accordingly. The High Court has failed to comply with specific 
B 
direction given by this Court. The order of the High Court, which has been 
passed contrary to the direction of this Court, is set aside. [Paras 10 and 11) 
[1097-C-E) 
1.2. This Court perused the file and in particular, the observations made 
by the Hon'ble Minister of Finance. Since the writ petition is pending, the 
c High Court would peruse these notings and the observations made by the 
Hon'ble Finance Minister and thereafter issue appropriate directions to the 
parties. Since the challenge is pending consideration, the High Court would 
take up both the issues of maintainability and the validity of sanction for 
prosecution simultaneously and decide the same on merits and in accordance 
with law and after affording opportunity to the parties. The CBI is directed to 
D place the notings and the relevant observations made by the Hon'ble Finance 
Minister in a sealed cover before the Judges of the High Court who hear the 
writ petition. Respondent no.1 will have no right of inspection till the entire 
file is perused by the High Court and orders issued thereupon. 
(Para 121 (1097-F-G; 1098-A-BI 
E 
Additional District Magistrate, Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla etc., 
(1976)2 SCC 521' and S.P. Gupta v. Union of India & Anr., [19811 Supp SCC 
872, cited. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 353 of 
F 2007. 
-~ 
From the Final Judgment and Order dated 21.02.2007 of the High Court 
of Delhi at New Delhi in W.P. (Crl.) No. 1401 of2002. 
WITH 
G 
Criminal Appeal No. 354 of2007. 
,__-
Gopal Subramanimum, ASG., Dayan Krishnan, Nikhil Nayyar, Gautam 
Narayan and Ankit Singhal for the Appellants. 
I (1976] Supp. SCR 172. 
H 2 (1982] 2 SCR 365. 
) 
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION"· ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL [LAKSHMANAN. J.] J Q9) 
P.N. Puri for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. Cr/. A. No. [email protected].(Crl.) 
No. I 307 of 2007. 
I. Leave granted. 
A 
B 
2. The above appeal was filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation, 
New D
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.