2021 (2) TMI 1340 - HC - Indian Laws

Challenged Government Order for CBI investigation, granted liberty to seek remedies if implicated. Fair legal process ensured.

Sri. Shashi Kumar Shivanna, S/o Late Shivanna Versus The Government of Karnataka, Rep. by Home Secretary, Vidhana Soudha; The Under Secretary Of Karnataka, Home Department (crimes) ; Central Bureau of Investigation Government of Karnataka

The appellant challenged a Government Order granting consent for a CBI investigation. The court considered an FIR registered against a different ... Seeking a writ of certiorari or quashing the Government Order dated 25.09.2019 granting consent for investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) - appellant submits that even though no FIR has been registered against the appellant, yet search was conducted in the premises of the appellant by the CBI - HELD THAT:- It is deemed appropriate to dispose of this writ appeal with liberty to the appellant to take recourse to such legal remedy as may be available to him under the law, in case the appellant is named as accused in the FIR. Needless to state that in such case, the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 22.07.2020 shall not be construed as prejudicial to the interest of the appellant. It is further clarified that it may be open for both the parties to raise all the contentions which are available to them in law. The appeal is disposed of. Issues:Challenge to Government Order granting consent for CBI investigation.Analysis:The appellant challenged an order granting consent for a CBI investigation, which was discussed by a learned Single Judge. The Advocate General informed the court that an FIR was registered against another individual, not the appellant, after the order was passed. The appellant was granted liberty to challenge any subsequent actions by the respondents. The appellant's Senior Counsel requested the appellant be allowed to seek legal remedy if named in the FIR. The court disposed of the appeal, granting the appellant liberty to take legal recourse if accused in the FIR, clarifying that the earlier order would not be prejudicial to the appellant's interests. Both parties were allowed to raise legal contentions.This judgment highlights the appellant's challenge to a Government Order granting consent for a CBI investigation. The court considered the registration of an FIR against a different individual and granted the appellant liberty to seek legal remedies if implicated in the future. The court emphasized that the earlier order would not harm the appellant's interests in case of being named in the FIR. The judgment ensures fairness by allowing both parties to present legal arguments in accordance with the law.