TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 1502
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ARTH PRATEEM SAHU, JJ. For Applicant : Shri Avi Singh & Shri Aayush Bhatia, Adv., Dr. N.K. Shukla, Sr. Adv. with Shri Rahul Tamaskar, Advocate For UOI/CBI : Shri B. Gopa Kumar, Adv For State : Shri Mateen Siddiqui, Dy. AG For Writ Petitioner : Shri Devershi Thakur, Adv. ORDER The following order of the Court was passed by Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. 1. These two review applications have been preferred seeking review of our order dated 30-1-2020 passed in WP PIL No.53 of 2018 (Kundan Singh Thakur v Union of India & Others) directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (for short 'the CBI') to register an FIR (First Information Report) within one week; seize the relevant original records from the concerned departmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uires a deeper look, and remedial measures would be taken including fixing responsibility or else, if there are certain misgivings due to half- baked inputs. Clarity must emerge from the report as to the working and withdrawal of funds which are being made through an organisation State Resource Center (SRC) or such other organisations involved in such activities. The Court would expect an affidavit at the level of the Chief Secretary within a period of four weeks. Post it after four week. 5. After the above order was passed a report was submitted on 1-10-2018 supported with affidavit of Smt. Chameli Chandrakar, District Rehabilitation Officer, Social Welfare Department, Bilaspur, along with an enquiry report. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irregularity to ascertain the persons who have misappropriated public funds and the officers arrayed as respondents being senior officers this Court deemed it appropriate to handover the matter to the CBI for registration of FIR and investigation. 9. Shri Avi Singh & Shri Aayush Bhatia, Advocates for the applicant in Review Petition No.43 of 2020 and Dr. N.K. Shukla, Sr. Advocate with Shri Rahul Tamaskar, Advocate for the applicant in Review Petition No.49 of 2020 have argued at length. 10. Learned counsels appearing for the applicants would mainly urge that the writ petitioner (Kundan Singh Thakur) has not approached the Court with clean hands and rule of audi alteram partem requires that the applicants should have been issued notice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... SCC 705, L. Narayana Swamy v State of Karnataka and Others (2016) 9 SCC 598 and Yashwant Sinha and Others v Central Bureau of Investigation, through its Director and Another 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1460. 14. In course of hearing, Shri B. Gopa Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the UOI & CBI, would inform that the CBI has already registered an FIR bearing No.RC 222/2020 A 0001 at AC-IV, Branch Bhopal against unknown members/office bearers of SRC and PRRC, unknown public servants and others for offence under Section 120-B read with Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC') and under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of the PC Act. 15. In our order under review we have clearly ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ired in this regard. 17. It is the settled proposition of law that a prospective accused has no right of hearing and the rule of audi alteram partem does not apply at the stage of registration of FIR as held by the Full Bench of this Court in Dhananjay Kumar v State of Chhattisgarh & Others WPCR No.121 of 2017 (decided on 30-1-2020). 18. In Dhananjay Kumar (supra) the Full Bench has relied upon the principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Union of India and Another v W.N. Chadha 1993 Supp (4) SCC 260 [popularly known as 'Bofors Case'], Narender G. Goel v State of Maharashtra and Another (2009) 6 SCC 65, Samaj Parivartan Samudaya and Others v State of Karnataka and Others (2012) 7 SCC 407, Anju Chaudhary v State of Uttar Pra....