TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (8) TMI 290
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 12.7.91 it is submitted that "the Swiss authorities would remove the blocking order on 31.8.91 and the account holders would withdraw the large funds, running into millions of dollars (equivalent to crores of rupees)" and prayed that the judgment may be pronounced by the end of August 1991 lest miscarriage of justice would be caused, and (2) that the learned'Additional SoliCitor General, Mr. Altar Ahmed appearing on behalf of the Union of India and CBI on 10.8.91 reaffirmed the above statement of the Union of India and requested that the C.B.I. should be allowed to proceed with the investigation without any interruption or' hindrance so that the investigation may be speeded up thereby meaning that the wheels of investigation already started moving on, should be permitted to be proceeded with unfettered and untrammelled so that the valuable evidence may be obtained from the Swiss Bank through their authorities without further loss of time, otherwise the account. in the Swiss Bank- now frozen may be defrozen. The Central Bureau of Investigation/Delhi police Establishment/ Anti Corruption Unit-IV; New Delhi registered the First Information Report dated 22.1.90 relating to Crime No....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stigation as they are, in fact, the ultimate beneficiaries of the payments'1 made by M/s A.B. Bofors and that under the procedure followed by banks in Switzerland, an authorised signatory can operate an account for the benefit of certain other persons regarding whom the authorised signatory has to submit certain declarations to the concerned bank and, therefore, it is very essential for the investigation of this case that the documentary and oral evidence should be collected regarding this' as well as the other aspects of the bank accounts in Switzerland. In the said application after referring to the exchange of letters dated 20.2.89 between the Government of India and Switzerland for mutual assistance agreeing that the Authorities of both the countries shall provide to each other the widest measure for assistance in the investigation of criminal matters, it has been stated that the competent authority to ask for assistance in India and abroad is the Court/Tribunal/ Judge or Magistrate exercising jurisdiction. The Director of the C.B.I. sent a request dated 23.1.1990 and supplemented by another request dated 26.1.1990 to the concerned authorities in Switzerland for freezing/blocki....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he copy of the FIR dated 22.1.90, mutual assistance agreement dated 20.2.89 etc. etc. The Court finally made a note reading thus: "Needless to mention that no observation made in this order shall tantamount to expression of opinion at any subsequent stage of enquiry or trial." When the matter stood thus, Shri V.S. Aggarwal on the strength of the notification issued by the Administrator of the Union Territory of Delhi assumed charge as a Special Judge inplaCe of Shri R.C. Jain. Before Shri Aggarwal, the Special Judge, Shri Harinder Singh Chowdhary, an Advocate filed a Public Interest Litigation by filing Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 12/90 under Article 51-A of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers which we are reproducing hereunder: "In the premises your petitioners humbly request that in order to maintain the dignity, prestige and the fair name of the country and the ideals enshrined in the Constitution that no rogatory letter be issued on the formal request of the CBI unless the allegations against named persons are established to the satisfaction of this Hon' ble Court:' It is further requested that no request for Rogatory or freezing bank account....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (Main) NO. 1821 of 1990 on the file of the High Court of Delhi. During the hearing of the above case before the High Court, several applications seeking impleadment/ intervention were filed in the proceedings among which one was filed by Mr. Prashant Bhushan, another by Mr. N. Ram and some more by various political parties. Mr. Justice M.K. Chawla who heard the Crl. Misc. (M)No. 1821/90 passed an order dated 3.12.90 directing all the applications for intervention to be kept on record and observed. "The interveners will be heard only if the Court feels the necessity of hearing further arguments after the conclusions of the arguments of ASG appearing for the GOI and the CBI". Thereafter on 6th and 7th December 1990, Mr. Justice M.K. Chawla heard the arguments advanced on behalf of the CBI as well of the Union of India. While it was so, the Janata Dal etc. approached this Court by filing a Special Leave Peti.tion (Criminal) No. 2320 of 1990 and this Court on 10.12.90 upon being mentioned and hearing the learned counsel for the parties, passed the following order: "We find on 3.12.90 the learned Judge indicated in his order that several applications had been filed by different p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Chowdhary has no locus standi to maintain the petition and consequently interveners also have no right to seek for impleadment or intervention and that the learned Judge having held so, took suo rnoto cognizance of the matter for the reasons assigned in his order and directed issue of show cause notice to the CBI and the State (Union of India) as to why the proceedings initiated on the strenth of the FIR dated 22.1.90 pending before the Special Judge be not quashed. It was at this stage, all these criminal appeals and the writ petition have been filed in this Court. This Court on 20.12.90 in Criminal Appeal No. 304/91 (arising out of SLP Crl. No. 2476/90 filed by the Janata Dal) passed the following order granting interim stay: " ...... In the meantime, the reasons leading to registration of the suo moto proceedings would not be operative. There shall be interim stay of proceedings including hearing before the High Court." In order to understand the scope of each of the criminal appeals and the prayer made therein, we are presently giving a brief note of the appeals and the writ petition. Criminal Appeal No. 304/91 This appeal. is preferred by the Janata Dal against the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eedings initiated on the strength of the FIR be not quashed. It may be noted that the appellants in this appeal have impleaded the High Court through its Registrar as a respondent. Writ Petition No. 114/91. This petition is filed by one Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Thera seeking certain directions relating to Bofors matter and for quashing the later part of the order dated 19.12.90 of the High Court. Mr. Anand Dev Giri, the learned Solicitor General assisted by M/s Anil Katyar and Ashok Bhan and thereafter the present Additional Solicitor General Mr. Altar Ahmed, Mr. A. Subba Rao and Mr. A.M. Khanwilkar, Advs. appearing on behalf of the Union of India as well as the CBI; Mr. Ram Jethmalani and Mr. Shanti Bhushan, both learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Prashant Bhushan appearing in Criminal Appeal Nos. 304,305 and 307 of 1991 and Mr. K.G. Bhaghat, the learned senior counsel appearing in Criminal Appeal Nos. 306 and 305 of 1991 on behalf of Mr. H.S. Chowdhary assisted by Mr. M.N. Shroff, besides a battery of lawyers advanced their respective arguments raising manifold questions of law with reference to the various provisions of the Constitution of India, Indian Penal Code, Code ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pra so that the CBI may effectively carry on with the investigation. However, we are not at present giving the details of the points urged except observing that the ques-tion as to whether the laws are so petrified as to unable to respond to the challenges made will be dealt with in detail in our main judgment. As mentioned albeit we, in order to avoid further delay in these matters, are inclined to give only our conclusions, the reasons in support of which will follow in our detailed judgment at a later stage. It is most relevant to note that none of the appellants before this Court save the Union of India and CBI is connected in any way with the present criminal proceeding initiated on the strength of the First Information Report which is now sought to be quashed by Mr. H.S. Chowdhary. Although in the F.I.R., the names of three accused are specifically mentioned none of them has been impleaded as a respondent to these proceedings by anyone of the appellants. Even Mr. Martin Ardbo, former President of M/s A.B. Bofors, who was impleaded as a proforma respondent in Criminal Appeal No. 310/91 has been given up by the Solicitor General. Therefore, under these circumstances, one should....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Court. 2. In our considered opinion, the initiation of the present proceedings by Mr. H.S. Chowdhary under Article 51-A of the Constitution of India cannot come within the true meaning and scope of public interest litigation. 3. Consequent upon the above conclusions (1) and (2), the appellants namely, Janata Dal, Communist Party of India (Marxist) and Indian Congress (Socialist) who are before this Court equally have no right of seeking their impleadment/ intervention. For the same reasons, Dr. P. Nalla Thampy Thera also has no right to file the Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 114 of 1991 as a public interest litigant. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the suo moto action of Mr. Justice M.K. Chawla in taking cogni- zance in exercise of the powers under Sections 397 and 401 read with SeCtion 482 of the Code based on the convoluted and strained reasoning and directing the office of the High Court of Delhi to register a case under the title Court on its motion v. State and CBI cannot be sustained. 5. Consequent upon the above conclusion No. (.4), we hold that the directions of Mr. Justice M.K. Chawla calling upon the CBI and the State to show cau....