SC quashes Patna HC order against CBI chief over Laloo’s arrest

The judges clarified that monitoring does not mean that a government department’s normal disciplinary control over its officer stood transferred to the High Court. The judges said that it had already been held by the apex court in the Jain hawala case that the process of monitoring the probe — to make investigating agencies perform — comes to an end with the filing of the charge-sheets. The court’s order came on a special leave petition (SLP) filed by the Union Government.

The SLP had argued that the High Court had sought to divest the control and supervision of the government over the functioning of the CBI including disciplinary action against any officer for action in calling for Army help without consulting the director. Calling the entire controversy over seeking Army assistance as “unfortunate”, the court said that while it would not like to go into who was responsible for the controversy, it is relevant to point out that Brigadier RP Nautiyal, officiating commander of the Danapur Cantt, had been told by the High Court judge that he had not given any direction for calling the Army.

Stating that the Brigadier had acted wisely in not taking action on the CBI’s request, the court said that there was no need to go further into the matter as calling for a report from the High Court would drag the judiciary into further controversy. The High Court, in its order in August, had observed that the pace of investigation appeared to have slowed down considerably ever since the new Director of CBI took over and had even expressed its unhappiness on the manner in which reports were submitted to the director bypassing the court.

The Union government’s SLP had questioned whether the CBI director was barred from inquiring into the “extremely serious” action of seeking Army assistance for execution of an arrest warrant “in total disregard of established procedure” as well as raising the issue of whether the High Court could disapprove of the very inquiry or the Director communicating with the Home Minister on the conduct of some CBI officer.

In its order, the Supreme Court held that as the monitoring process came to an end with the filing of the charge-sheet, the HC had no reason to seek an explanation from the CBI director on disciplinary proceedings against his officers.

The court also held that there was no reason for any Central Bureau of Investigation official to approach the High Court for directions for seeking Army assistance since the special court had already issued arrest warrants.