New Delhi, Nov 12 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned the Jharkhand Government’s petition challenging the High Court’s order mandating a CBI investigation into alleged illegal stone mining case and attacks on villagers in the Sahibganj district by two weeks.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar was hearing the challenge to the order of the Jharkhand High Court which in February dismissed the Government’s plea for quashing the FIR registered by the CBI without taking the State Government’s permission to proceed with the investigation.
The case involves individuals allegedly close to Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren.
The charges were filed by the CBI under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Arms Act, the SC/ST Act, and the Jharkhand Mines & Minerals Concession Rules, 2004.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the Jharkhand Government, sought the adjournment.
Previously, on May 3, the Supreme Court issued a notice to the CBI but allowed it to continue investigation.
The Court however restrained CBI from filing a final report or chargesheet until further orders.
The state government’s petition under Article 226 argued that the CBI initiated the FIR without obtaining state consent, violating Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, which mandates state approval for jurisdictional extension.
Additionally, the state requested a halt to the CBI’s ongoing investigation.
The controversy originates from an incident in which villagers protesting alleged illegal mining in Sahibganj were attacked.
Initially, the local Chief Judicial Magistrate ordered FIR registration under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, but it was delayed, leading the complainant to file a writ before the High Court to transfer the investigation to the CBI.
The High Court, on August 18, declined to dismiss the petition despite a withdrawal request and instructed the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the accused’s conduct.
The court clarified that when evidence suggests a cognizable offence, a formal FIR can be filed without a preliminary inquiry, referencing the Supreme Court’s decision in Central Bureau of Investigation v. T.H. Vijayalakshmi.
The court concluded that a preliminary inquiry is unnecessary if credible information of a cognizable offence is already available, aligning with the precedent in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, which mandates an FIR when a cognizable offence is apparent.
