LAWS(CHH)-2023-3-89

VINOD TIWARI Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Decided On March 01, 2023
VINOD TIWARI Appellant
V/S
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks direction to register an FIR against respondent no.4 under The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and IPC and to investigate the offence in accordance with law and further prays that respondent no.1 be directed to submit periodic status reports of investigation before this Court. Further prayer made is that respondent no.2 the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Department be directed to reassess the income tax details of respondent no.4 and his family members during the period he served as Public Servant. Further direction was also sought that respondent No.3, the Enforcement Directorate be directed to lodge an ECIR and investigate offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that respondent no.4 contested the elections for 3 consecutive terms commencing from the years 2008, 2013 and 2018 respectively and served as Public Servant as Chief Minister of State and played key role in State governance. It is submitted that during the intervening period of subsequent years, there had been increase in assets of respondent no.4 and his associates, which is disproportionate to his/their known sources of income. Referring to the pleading, he would submit that the comparative chart which was filed before the election officer i.e.,election-affidavit would show that many-fold increase in the assets have been shown for three consecutive years. It is further submitted that the petitioner knocked the doors of various central agencies, but all of them have shirked their responsibilities and lastly the Economic Offences Wing of the State to which the said complaint was forwarded came out with a reply that the particulars cannot be unfolded as the applications are pending.

(3.) He placed reliance in Lok Prahari through its General Secretary S.N. Shukla Versus Union of India (2018) 4 SCC 699 to submit that the Court can look into the veracity of the electionaffidavits and can very well direct investigation by Respondent no.1 and 3. Further reliance is placed in Secretary, Minor Irrigation & Rural Engineering Services, U.P. versus Sahngoo Ram Arya (2002) 5 SCC 521 to submit that the Court would be competent to direct the enquiry by CBI in cases where there is a sufficient material to come to a prima facie conclusion that there is a need for any enquiry irrespective of the fact that it has not been supported by the petitioner in the pleading. Under the circumstances, this Court could very well direct the CBI and in alternative since according to CBI, the complaint has been forwarded to EOW, they may be directed to finish the enquiry within a time-frame.