JEEWAN KUMAR RAUT & ANR. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,

Citation: [2009] 10 S.C.R. 272 · Decided: 07-07-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

(2009] 10 S.C.R. 272 
A 
JEEWAN KUMAR RAUT & ANR. 
v. 
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 1133-1134 of 2009) 
B 
JULY 7, 2009 
[S.B. SINHA AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ.] 
" 
TRANSPLANTATION OF HUMAN ORGANS ACT, 
1944: 
c 
Section 22 - Cognizance taken on a complaint filed by 
CBI - Applicability of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. - Held: Not 
applicable - CBI having specially been empowered both under 
the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 as a/so 
under Cr.P.C. to carry out investigation and file a charge sheet 
' 
.. 
D is precluded from doing so only by reason of Section 22 of 
the TOHO Act - It is doubtful whether the authorized Officer 
of the department to carry out investigation on a complaint 
made by a third party would be entitled to assess the accused 
E 
and carry on investigation as if he is a police officer -
Parliament to take appropriate measures to suitably amend 
the law in the near future - Hope expressed. 
' 
In these appeals, the question that arose for 
' 
consideration was as to whether Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. 
F is applicable in a case where cognizance has been taken 
under Section 22 of the Transplantation of Human Organs 
Act, 1944 on a complaint filed by the CBI. 
Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
G 
HELD: 1.1. Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 
1944 (TOHO) is a special Act. It deals with the subjects 
mentioned therein, viz., offences relating to removal of 
human organs, etc. Having regard to the importance of 
H 
272 
JEEWAN KUMAR RAUT & ANR. v. CENTRAL 
273 
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 
·.-
the subject only, enactment of the said regulatory statute 
A 
was imperative. TOHO provides for appointment of an 
appropriate authority to deal with the matters specified 
in Sub-section (3) of Section 13 thereof. By reason of the 
aforementioned provision, an appropriate authority has 
specifically been authorized inter alia to investigate any 
B 
complaint of the breach of any of the provisions of TOHO 
or any of the rules made thereunder and take appropriate 
.y 
action. The Appropriate Authority, subject to exceptions 
provided for in TOHO, thus, is only authorized to 
investigate cases of breach of any of the provisions c 
thereof, whether penal or otherwise. [Paras 12 and 13] 
[290-G-H; 291-A-B] 
1.2. Ordinarily, any person can set the criminal law 
in motion. The Parliament and the State Legislatures, 
D 
~ 
however, keeping in view tile sensitivity and/ or 
importance of the subject, have carved out specific areas 
where violations of any of the provisions of a special 
statute like TOHO can be dealt with only by the 
authorities specified therein. [Para 13] [291-C] 
E 
2. The FIR lodged before the officer incharge of the 
Gurgaon Police Station was by way of information. It 
, 
disclosed not only commission of an offence under TOHO 
., 
but also under various provisions of the Indian Penal 
Code. The officer incharge of the Police Station, however, 
F 
was not authorized by the appropriate government to 
deal with the matter in relation to TOHO; but; the 
respondent was. In that view of the matter, the 
investigation of the said complaint was handed over to 
it. [Para 14] [291-D, E] 
G 
"""" 
3.1. TOHO being a special Act and the matter relating 
to dealing with offences thereunder having been 
regulated by reason of the provisions thereof, there 
cannot be any manner of doubt whatsoever that the same 
shall prevail over the provisions of Cr,.P.C. [Para 15] [291-
H 
274 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009] 10 S.C.R. 
A H; 292-A] 
3.2. The investigation in terms of Section 13(3)(iv) of 
TOHO, thus, must be conducted by an authorized officer. 
Nobody else could do it. For the aforementioned reasons, 
8 the officer incharge of the Gurgaon Police Station had no 
other option but to hand ove; the investigation to the 
appropriate authority. [Para 16] [292-8] 
4. The respondent has been constituted under the 
Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. In terms of 
C the provisions of the said Act, the authorities specified 
therein could make investigation in connection with a 
complaint. The mode and manner in which the 
investigation could be carried out have been laid down 
in the Act and/ or the manual framed thereunder. It is for 
D the aforementioned reason, upon receipt of the complaint 
from the officer incharge of the Gurgaon Police Station, 
it presumably having made a preliminary inquiry, lodged 
the FIR. Only because it lodged the FIR and proceeded 
in terms of the sa

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.