RAJ NANDAN CHOUDHURY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for modification and/or rescinding of the order dated 22nd November, 2006 passed by the Division Bench in W.P. 16736 (W) of 2006, whereby direction was given to the Director, C.B.I. to make a thorough investigation of the matter relating to the disappearance of one Lalon Chowdhury from police custody.

(2.) Appearing on behalf of the State of West Bengal, Mr. Nisith Adhikary, learned Additional Advocate General, has submitted that the petitioner approached the Hon'ble Court with a prayer for a direction upon C.B.I. to enquire into the alleged disappearance of Lalon Chowdhury, suppressing the fact that direction had already been given by the learned CJM, Howrah to DSP, Town South Howrah to investigate the case. Since investigation had already been launched by DSP, Town South Howrah, as directed by the learned CJM, Howrah, there is no scope for parallel investigation being conducted by C.B.I.

(3.) Challenging the authority of the C.B.I. to investigate the case without the consent of the State Government, Mr. Adhikary has argued that the matter squarely falls within the purview of the State subject and, as such, C.B.I. cannot usurp the power of the State Government regarding investigation of cognizable offence occurring well within the territorial jurisdiction of a State. Referring to the Government of India Act, 1935 (Entry 39 of list I, 7th Schedule) and (Entry 3 of list II, 7th Schedule) of Govt. of India Act, 1935 and The Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, it is submitted that extension of power and jurisdiction of members of police force could not be effected without the consent of the Government of the province or the Chief Commissioner. Similar provision has been incorporated in Entry 80 of list I, 7th Schedule and Entry 2 of list II, 7th Schedule. Encroachment upon the jurisdiction of a state subject by another authority without the consent of the concerned State Government is totally unwarranted, as contended by Mr. Adhikary. Actually, in Hari Singh v. State of U. P., reported in (2006)2 C Cr LR (SC) 366, the Apex Court has underlined the proposition that the Court cannot direct C.B.I. to make an enquiry of a cognizable offence without the consent of the State Government, as submitted by Mr. Adhikary.