LexSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus ARJUN SINGH AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
v.
ARJUN SINGH AND OTHERS
NOVEMBER 17, 1992
B
{M.H. KANIA, CJ., N.M. KASLIWAL AND.K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.]
c
Commissions of Enquiry Act, 195rSection ll~ommission of. en-
. quirf-Enlargenient of tenns of original reference by notification-Whether
second reference illega~Supreme Court's dire~tions to State Government.
· · -
The Leader of Opposition in the Legislative Assembly of the State
filed a ·writ Petition in the High Court on 18.10.1987, highlighting the
· illegalities,-irregularities and misuse of powers by high officials .and ptibl_ic
men in the Government in the matter of a lottery condu~ed by one
Churhat Welfare Society and sought appropriate directions from the High
D
Court.
F
G
The Writ Petition w~s decided on January 20, 1989. On 24.2.1989, a
notification was issued in purst1ance to the judgment, appointing a com-
mission of enquiry presif,led over by a _Judge of the Madras High Court.
JJy a notification issued under' Section 11 of the Commissions of
Enquiry Act 1952, th,e con1_mission was empowered to follow the procedure
under the Act.
During the pendency of the enquiry, the appellant State Government
by a· fresh notiOcation .dated 29.3.1990 enlarged , the terms of the original
reference.
The respondent filed a Writ Petition challenging the second refer-
ence made under notification dated 29.3.1990.
~ .
.
'
'
.
,
The High Court though rejected all the grounds on which the
notification of the secon(I reference was challenged, quashed the notifica·
tion dated 29.3.1990, holding that it suffered from non application of mind
and invalid exercise of powers under Section 3 of the Act.
The appellant-State Government against the judgment of the High
H Court preferred the present appeal before this Court.
' .
.
162
-
-
_,.
STATE OFM.P. v. ARJUN SINGH
163
Disposing of the appeal, this Court
HELD: 1.1. The terms of reference contained in Clauses A and B of
the second reference are al~ady covered in the terms of the original
reference. In this view of the matter there can be no bar to the commission
to enquire into these matters under the original reference itself. (166-C]
1.2. So far as Clause 'C' of the second reference is concerned, the
original reference in term No.1 itself covers the question as to how the
affairs of the Churhat Children Welfare Society are conducted and ho'r
A
B
the share of its profit derived and the money collected through lottery has
been utilised. Nothing precludes the commission from making an e«Juiry C
as to whether any profit derived or money collected through Churhat
Lottery had been utilised for constructing the mansion/bungalow at Kerva
Dam. [166-D]
1.3. The High Court rightly quashed the portion of Clause C as there
was no relevant material before the State Government for enlarging the
scope of existing ·enquiry under the original reference. [166-F]
D
1.4. The High Court's judgment does not preclude the State Govern-
ment from appointing any commission of enquiry according to law afte~
applying its mind to any fresh or further material placed before it. Such E
formation of opinion depends on the subjective satisfaction of an ap-
propriate Government but should be based on an objective or real material
and not merely on some vague allegations or hearsay evidence or to make
fishing enquiry. [166-H, 167-A]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.4842 of F
1992.
From the Judgment and Order dated · 4.3.1992 of the Madhya
Pradesh High Court in Misc. Petition No.1681 of 1990.
Shanti Bhushan, G.L. Sanghi, N.C. Jain and Satish K. Agnihotri for G
the Appellant.
·
Kapil Sibal, N.S. Kale, Rajinder Singh, J.B. Dadachanji, Vasant B.
Mehta, Mrs. A.K. Verma, Mrs. S. Pathak, Ravindra Srivastava. (For JBD
& Co.) S.V. Deshpande and S. Sukumaran for the Respondents.
H
164
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1992) SUPP. 3 S.C.R.
A
The Judgment of tl:ie Court was delivered by
'KASLIWAL, J. ·Special leave granted.
This appeal by the State of Madhya Pradesh is directed against the
judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated 4.3.1992 in Miscel-
B laneous Petition No.1681 of 1990, quashing the notification dated 29.3.1990.
· · Shri Kailash Joshi the then Leader of Opposition in the Legislative
Assembly of the State of Ma.dhya Pradesh filed a Writ Petition (M.P.
No.3909 of 1987) on 18.10.1987. Appropriate directions were sought from
the Court in the matter of a lottery conducted by Churhat Welfare SociExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.