Writ of prohibition unavailable where investigators have jurisdiction and economic offence probe may continue pending challenge.

A writ of prohibition is an exceptional remedy and will not issue as of right. The Court upheld the respondents' jurisdiction to investigate the petitioner's import transactions and rejected the argument that their authority was confined to the Union Territory of Delhi. It further noted that, where economic offences are suspected, judicial interference with an ongoing investigation should be limited in public interest. The petitioner was left free to challenge any consequential action at the appropriate stage, and the request to restrain the investigation was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ of prohibition could be issued to restrain the respondents from continuing the search and investigation into the petitioner's import transactions.

Analysis: A writ of prohibition is not a writ of right and is issued only in appropriate cases. The respondents were held to have jurisdiction to investigate into the petitioner's affairs, and the contention that their authority was confined to the Union Territory of Delhi was rejected. The Court also observed that, where economic offences are suspected, it would be slow to interfere with an ongoing investigation, particularly in public interest. The petitioner was left at liberty to challenge any action taken on the basis of the investigation at the appropriate stage.

Conclusion: The request for a writ of prohibition was rejected and the investigation was permitted to continue.

---