High Court power to order CBI investigation survives absent State consent, but requires demonstrably unfair or unreliable investigation.

A High Court may, in an appropriate case, direct a CBI investigation under Article 226 despite the absence of State consent under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act or notifications under that Act. This exceptional power applies where public interest requires intervention and the existing investigation lacks fairness, impartiality, or credibility. The notes state that transfer was not warranted because the State CID had examined available aspects, collected material evidence, conducted the investigation carefully, and filed a charge-sheet. Further investigation remains available if additional evidence emerges under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the High Court may direct CBI investigation of a cognizable offence without a notification under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 or the State Government's consent; (ii) Whether the investigation by the State CID required transfer to the CBI.

Issue (i): Whether the High Court may direct CBI investigation of a cognizable offence without a notification under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 or the State Government's consent.

Analysis: The power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, though wide, is not equivalent to the Supreme Court's plenary power under Article 142. Nevertheless, the requirement of State consent under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 does not operate as a condition precedent where a court directs a CBI investigation. Absence of a notification under Section 3 or an order under Section 5 of that Act likewise does not deprive the High Court of authority to order such investigation in an appropriate case. This exceptional power is to be exercised where public interest so requires and the existing investigation is unfair, partial, or lacking credibility.

Conclusion: The High Court can direct CBI investigation without the State Government's consent or a notification under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 in a fit case.

Issue (ii): Whether the investigation by the State CID required transfer to the CBI.

Analysis: The case diary showed that the State CID had investigated all available aspects of the sensitive crime, collected material evidence, and conducted the investigation carefully. The investigation did not disclose unfairness or partiality, and a charge-sheet had already been filed. Further investigation remained available under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 upon discovery of additional evidence.

Conclusion: The investigation did not warrant transfer to the CBI; the finding is against the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The existing State CID investigation was found objective and credible, with the statutory facility of further investigation remaining available.

Ratio Decidendi: A High Court may exceptionally order CBI investigation notwithstanding the absence of State consent, but only where the existing investigation demonstrably lacks fairness, impartiality, or credibility.

---