HC questions CBI’s mindset, flags disinterest when asked to take over investigations
The assertion came after Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj observed that the CBI, in its inimitable style, pleaded lack of resources and an unwillingness to accept any further investigation
Taking note of the CBI’s varying stands, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has asserted that the premier agency on one hand is vehemently claiming its right to investigate cases where States dispute its jurisdiction. On the other, it adopts a non-committal and disinterested approach when courts seek its response on taking over investigations.
The assertion came after Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj observed that the CBI, in its inimitable style — reflecting a complete disinterest in accepting an assignment — pleaded lack of resources and an unwillingness to accept any further investigation.
“This court finds the conduct of Central Bureau of Investigation completely strange in as much while it is contesting tooth and nail to claim right to investigate the matters with the States, who are often reluctant or dispute jurisdiction of the CBI over the subject. However, in almost all the cases when the court asked for a response, the reply is always non-committal reflecting a disinterested investigating agency,” Justice Bhardwaj asserted.
The Bench added that this was notwithstanding the fact that separate orders for the assignment of resources had been passed in accordance with its demand when the CBI was asked to assist the court. “This court has, however, recorded the aforesaid only to reflect upon the working and mindset of the officials supervising the affairs of the Central Bureau of Investigation, for their introspection and renewed approach,” Justice Bhardwaj asserted.
The Bench also expressed serious concern over the manner in which the investigation was conducted by the Punjab Police and the quality of its supervision in two linked NDPS cases from Fazilka. Granting regular bail to the petitioners, Justice Bhardwaj ordered that further investigation in both the FIRs would be carried out by a Special Investigation Team under the supervision and control of Nilabh Kishore, IPS, ADGP, Anti-Narcotics Task Force (ANTF), Punjab.
Justice Bhardwaj made it clear that the court’s concern stemmed from glaring gaps in the probe. After posing seven specific queries on evidence linkages, call details, the chain of narcotics supply and other issues, the Bench noted that the State counsel could not answer any of them while pleading that investigation on those aspects was still pending.
Rejecting the explanation, Justice Bhardwaj asserted: I am afraid that the argument being put forth about the investigation being pending on these aspects does not inspire confidence at this stage since final report, after investigation, has already been filed against the accused persons”.
The Bench, earlier during the course of hearing, was told that one of the FIRs was registered on January at Jalalabad Sadar police station in Fazilka under the NDPS Act. The petitioners contended they were implicated for protesting alleged police highhandedness and illegal detention of a minor in an earlier FIR. They also alleged denial of CCTV footage.
