SC stays Gauhati High Court order declaring CBI unconstitutional

Earlier in the day,Kumar’s lawyer filed a caveat requesting the court not to pass any order without first hearing him. Since the CJI was attending a function organised to mark the National Legal Services Day,the matter was fixed for hearing in the evening.

During the hearing,Kumar’s counsel questioned the locus standi of the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) to challenge the HC verdict. However,the court refused to accept this argument and proceeded to hear the matter,with Attorney General Goolam E Vahanvati appearing for the Centre.

In its petition,the Centre contended that the HC’s order would adversely impact thousands of criminal cases pending across the country. Making out a case for urgent hearing,the Centre said the judgment “directly impacts about nine thousand trials currently underway and about one thousand investigations which are being undertaken by the CBI”. The petition also said that if the HC order was not stayed,“it will frustrate the law machinery and may result in multiplicity of proceedings.”

The Centre noted that the “order is already being seized upon by various accused persons in various proceedings in the country to seek a stay of further proceedings against them.”

The Centre also contended that the HC had erred in holding that the constitution of CBI was illegal,that the resolution constituting it needed presidential assent and that it could not be treated as a police force,adding that the 50-year-old resolution,issued by the home ministry,through which the CBI was established “had stood the test of time”.

Terming the High Court order quashing the resolution as “ex facie erroneous,contrary to the express provisions of the Constitution and the DSPE Act”,the Centre said it “flies in the face of several judgements of the Supreme Court which had categorically upheld the constitutional validity of the DSPE Act,1946.”

“It is submitted that the apex court,in a series of decisions,has held that the CBI is constituted under the DSPE Act,1946. In these circumstances,the High Court could not have,as a matter of judicial discipline and propriety,traversed beyond the said decisions and upset the binding nature of the judgments of this court (Supreme Court) and come to a conclusion that despite the decisions of apex court,the CBI was not constituted under the DSPE Act,1946,” the petition said.