New Delhi, November 9
In a major relief to the Centre and the CBI, the Supreme Court today stayed the Gauhati High Court verdict declaring as unconstitutional the setting up of the premier investigation agency 50 years ago primarily to deal with corruption and criminal cases with inter-state ramifications.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice P Sathasivam and Justice Ranjana Desai passed the order after hearing an appeal filed by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), which holds administrative control over the CBI, on an emergency basis. During the brief 15-minute hearing held at the official residence of the CJI, the Bench said it was staying the High Court verdict as it had created an extraordinary situation prompting accused in at least two sensational cases to seek stay of trial against them. The Bench, however, did not specify the accused or the cases, though media reports have talked about former Union Telecom Minister A Raja and the 2G scam in this connection.

Arguing for the DoPT, Attorney General GE Vahanvati sought an immediate stay on the November-6 High Court verdict, which “directly impacts” trial in around 9,000 CBI cases and investigation in another 1,000 cases registered by the agency. Emerging from the courtroom, Vahanvati told mediapersons that the SC stay had put to rest all doubts over CBI’s legal status arising from the HC judgment and that the agency would not face any impediment in pursuing its cases that had already gone on trial or in the investigation stage involving searches and seizures.

At the hearing, he told the Bench that the HC had quashed the April 1, 1963 resolution of the Union Home Ministry for setting up the CBI on two grounds - the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 had not conferred any power on the executive to create the CBI and that the resolution had not specified that it was being issued under the 1946 Act.

Questioning the wisdom of the HC, the AG said Section 2 of the DSPE Act did empower the Central Government to constitute a “special police force”. Further, merely because the resolution did not refer to Section 2, it could not be concluded that it was not issued under the DSPE Act.

The apex court also issued notice on the DoPT’s petition asking the respondents to file their response before the next hearing on December 6. The DoPT has named Narendra Kumar, on whose petition the High Court had delivered the judgment, the Centre and the CBI as respondents. However, the AG told the Bench that the CBI would also file an appeal in the apex court, challenging the High Court verdict.

In its appeal, the DoPT has given 46 grounds for setting aside the High Court verdict, besides six reasons for seeking an immediate stay. Among the reasons for the stay was the fact that the verdict “has serious ramifications on the functioning of the CBI as it has quashed a 50-year-old resolution which had stood the test of time”.

“The CBI has been functioning effectively and has a staff of around 6,000 people all of whom are engaged in the investigation and prosecution of various cases. The HC judgment is thus likely to have serious and severe consequences and it is absolutely necessary in the interests of justice and convenience that immediate ad-interim orders be granted staying the said judgment and operation thereof,” the petition said.

Notice to respondents

* Acting on the Department of Personnel and Training’s petition, the SC Bench issues notice asking the respondents to file their response before the next hearing on December 6

*The DoPT has named Narendra Kumar, on whose petition the High Court had delivered the judgment, the Centre and the CBI as respondents

* The SC Bench rejects Kumar’s plea against allowing the DoPT, which holds administrative control over the CBI, to challenge the HC verdict 

The SC stay has put to rest all doubts over CBI’s legal status arising from the HC judgment and that the agency will not face any impediment in pursuing its cases


—  GE Vahanvati, attorney general