Case: Union Of India Vs. Prakash P. Hinduja


Decision:
1[ds]find the High Court judgment to be quite confusing and self contradictory. In para 18(c) it is observed that "there is no requirement to seek clearance before charge sheets are filed" and in para 19 it is said that "the only requirement in this regard is of reporting and the role of the CVC on this would be to give its comments in its annual report". In para 20 it is said that "the direct power of review granted to the CVC is only of pending applications for sanction" and "the CVC is not cast with the role of reviewing as such the steps taken in the course of investigation and thereafter". In para 21 it is said that "the duty to report of the steps taken in the course of investigation is not and cannot be equated with the duty to obtain prior approval or consent of any other authority to these steps". Again in para 24 it is said that "the contention of the petitioner that a breach of these directions would render the action of the CBI void since the directions are to be rigidly complied with is equally misconceived". It is further said that "even the rigid compliance with these directions cannot be beyond the CVC over-viewing CBIs working and the CBIs reporting to the CVC."34. The High Court having arrived at the aforesaid findings, the only result which could logically follow was to dismiss the petition. There was absolutely no occasion for allowing the same and quashing the cognizance and further proceedings in the case.