CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 127 · Decided: 08-07-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.N. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

-
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 
v. 
STATE OF RA.IASTHAN AND ORS. 
JULY 8, 1996 
[G.N. RAY AND B.L. HANSARIA, J.T.] 
Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973-Ss. 3, 4, 5, 56-Deihi Special 
Police Establishment Act, 1946-Sections 3 & 5-lnvestigation of offences 
under FERA-Section 4 Cr.P.C. not applicable-Commission of offences out-
side lndiir-Power.i and jurisdiction of member of Delhi Special Police Es-
tablislunent-Held, investigation 111ay be n1ade only with pennission of Central 
Govenunent. 
A 
B 
c 
Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI, made an application u/s. 
155(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, before the Chief Judicial D 
Magistrate, for grant of permission to him to investigate case u/S. 25(1) 
r/w S. 56 of the Foreign Exchange (Regulation) Act, 1973 against respon-
dent 3, stating that the case was registered on the allegation that respon-
dent No. 3, an Indian National and a resi~ent in India, had purchased 
three properties in United Kingdom, got education of his daughter in U.K., 
purchased Rolls Royace Car etc., incurring heavy expenditure without any E 
permission from Reserve Bank of India or Government of India, thereby, 
committing an offence u/S. 25(1) r/w S. 56 of FERA and that as per Sec. 
62 of FERA, the offences punishable u/S. 56 FERA being non-cognizable 
within the meaning of Code of Criminal Procedure, in order to investigate 
the non- cognizable offence, permission was required. The Chief Judicial F 
Magistrate dismissed the application holding that u/S. 5 of t"ERA, the 
State Government may by order and subject to such conditions and 
limitations as it thinks fit to impose, authorise any officer of Custon1s or 
any Central Excise officer or any Police Officer or any Otlicer or the 
Central Government or a State Government to exercise such of the powers 
and discharge such of the duties of the Director Enforcement or any of the G 
Ollicer of the Directorate of Enforcement or any other Ollicer ol' the 
Enforcement under FERA as may be specified in the order, but no notifica-
tion could be produced which had empowered CBI u/Ss. 4 & 5 of FERA to 
cause Investigation in respect of the offences under FERA; that the FIR 
bad been registered by the CBI U/S. 154(1) Cr.P.C. while the offence alleged H 
127 
128 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A against respondent was non-cognizable offence u/S. 62 of' FERA and FIR 
u/S. 154(1) Cr.P.C. could be registered for cognizable offences and not 
non-cognizable offences and that in the FIR it was alleged that the viola· 
tion of the provisions of FERA had been committed in a foreign country 
for the inYestigation of \\'hich it \\'as necessary to take permission of the 
B Government of India u/S. 188 Cr.P.C. but permission f'rom Central 
<;overnn1ent having not been taken, the application filed for per1nission 
was liable to be dismissed. The appellant made an application u/S. 482 
Cr.P.C. which was dismissed by observing that the reasonings given by the 
Chief Judicial Magistrate being justified, there was no occa!oiion to inter-
fere with the same. This appeal had been filed against the order of the High 
C Court. The appellant submitted that Section 5 of FERA empowers the 
Central Government to entrus1t the functions of Director or other officer 
of Enforcement or any Police Oflicer or any other Oflicer of the Central 
Govern1nent or of a State to exercise such pO\\'ers and discharge such of 
duties; that any Oflicer who llrns been entrusted with the duties and 
D functions of the Directorate of Enforcement would be bound by the law 
which empowered them to be deemed as 'Officers of Enforcement'; that 
there cannot be any authority other than authority mentioned u/S. 155 
Cr.P.C. to deal with the cases under FERA being non-cognizable offence; 
that the offences under FERA were notified for investigation by CBI in 
E exercise of the powers conferred on the Central Government vide Ss. 3 and 
5 r/w S. 6 of the Delhi Special Establishment Act, 1946 vide Order No. 
228/2174-AVD/II dated 26.10.1977; that Section 5 of FERA confers authority 
on Central Government to entrust the duties and functions of Director of 
Enforcement or his subordinate to a Police Oflicer, hence the notification 
F 
issued u/s. 3 of DSPE Act authorising the Oflicers of DSPE to investigate 
into the offences under FERA must be held to be a due authorisation u/S. 
5 of FERA; that the CBI, Special Police Establishment, is a Specialised 
Investigating Agency constituted
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.