Preliminary Enquiry by CBI not mandatory in every corruption case, revived FIR: SC

  • Home
  • Preliminary Enquiry by CBI not mandatory in every corruption case, revived FIR: SC

CA Bimal Jain | Oct 14, 2021 | Views 94351

Preliminary Enquiry by CBI not mandatory in every corruption case, revived FIR: SC

Preliminary Enquiry by CBI not mandatory in every corruption case, revived FIR: SC

In Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) v. Thommandru Hannah Vijayalakshmi [Criminal Appeal No. 1045 of 2021 dated October 08, 2021], Central Bureau of Investigation (“the Appellant”) filed an appeal impugning a judgment Order dated February 11, 2020 passed by the Honorable High Court of Telangana (Telangana HC) by which a Writ Petition by Thommandru Hannah Vijayalakshmi (“the Respondent”) was allowed and a First Information Report (“FIR”), against the Respondent, dated September 20, 2017 was set aside.

The FIR had been registered against the Respondent for being in possession (allegedly) of assets disproportionate to her known sources of income. The FIR has thus been registered for offences punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”). The Telangana HC quashed the FIR on the basis that the Appellant didn’t conduct a Preliminary Enquiry under the CBI (Crime) Manual, 2005 before the registration of the said FIR.

In the case, the Appellant contended that CBI Manual does not make it mandatory to conduct a Preliminary Enquiry (“PE”) before the registration of the FIR. It was stated that a PE cannot be made mandatory for all cases of corruption and is only conducted when the information received is not sufficient to register a regular case.

After taking perusal of all the facts and evidences of the case, the Honorable Supreme Court of India held that if CBI chooses not to hold a PE, the Respondent cannot demand it as a matter of right and therefore, revived the FIR against the Respondent which was erstwhile quashed.

(Author can be reached at [email protected])

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose and for the reader’s personal non-commercial use. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Further, no portion of our article or newsletter should be used for any purpose(s) unless authorized in writing and we reserve a legal right for any infringement on usage of our article or newsletter without prior permission.

Join Studycafe's What's App Group or Telegram Channel for Latest Updates on Income Tax, GST, Companies Act, Judgements and CA, CS, ICWA, and MUCH MORE!"




Author Bio

My Recent Articles

ITAT: Ownership of several flats under JDA is eligible for Capital Gain Exemption Guidelines on grant of bail to accused not arrested during investigation post filing of Chargesheet Irrecoverable loss incurred due to bad weather and technical snags would be considered as Revenue Loss SEZ falls within the meaning of ‘any person’ as given under Section 54 of the CGST Act and shall be entitled to refund Best Judgment Assessment Order withdrawn as Petitioner filed relevant returns in accordance with order of High Court View All Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *