Modality Proposed By Calcutta HC To CBI For Filing Appeals Not A Mandate : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that the judgment of the Calcutta High Court, which proposed a mechanism for filing of appeals before the HC against acquittals in CBI cases, should not be treated as a mandate.The High Court, in its order passed on June 8, 2022, had suggested that against an order of acquittal, the Zonal Head should obtain a comments of the Prosecutor and the Assistant Solicitor...
The Supreme Court held that the judgment of the Calcutta High Court, which proposed a mechanism for filing of appeals before the HC against acquittals in CBI cases, should not be treated as a mandate.
The High Court, in its order passed on June 8, 2022, had suggested that against an order of acquittal, the Zonal Head should obtain a comments of the Prosecutor and the Assistant Solicitor General should send the comments directly to the Director General of Prosecution for taking a decision as to whether an appeal should be filed or not. This modality was proposed by the High Court to ensure that the appeals are filed in time.
Taking exception to the High Court direction, the CBI appealed to the Supreme Court. A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Bela Trivedi held :
"We deem it appropriate to clarify that the impugned judgment dated 08.06.2022 passed by the High Court of Calcutta in I.A. no. CRAN/1/2018 in CRMSPL/134/2018 should not be read as a mandate and direction contrary to Section 378(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). Statutory compliance is necessary, and not discretionary".
The Court had earlier directed the CBI to file an affidavit detailing the mechanism either in existence or proposed, that can be put in place so that appeals can be filed before the High Court within the period of limitation. The CBI complied with the direction and produced the circular to ensure that all appeals are filed within the limitation period.
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
The issue related to the filing of an appeal by CBI against an order of acquittal by the trial court before the HC. In most of the cases, the appeals were filed after a long delay when the period of limitation expired. Application for special leave under section 378(4) CrPC was filed after a year or so from the date of delivery of trial court judgment.
The High Court wanted the CBI to file appeals within the limitation period.
The ASG apprised the HC of the circular of 2020 where specified timelines for submission were given. As per the procedure, the Prosecutor had to submit his comments along with the certified copy of the judgment to the Head of the Branch, who in turn sent it to the Head of Zones and then finally to the Director of Prosecution.
All in all, it took 26 days to get the final opinion of the director of CBI as to whether an appeal against acquittal shall be filed or not.
Inordinate delays in filing of appeals by CBI, send ASG’s comments directly to Director of prosecution observed Calcutta HC
The HC observed that “the circular dated 4th March 2020 is maintained only in papers. It is not being followed and to date, the appeals are filed by the CBI against order of acquittal after the expiry of the period of limitation”
Therefore, the HC came up with the proposal that the Zonal Head should obtain comments from the prosecutor and ASG should send his comments directly to the director of Prosecution.
The HC observed that the director of Prosecution shall take a decision within 7 days as to whether an appeal has to be filed or not.
Case title: CBI v. S.R. Ramamani
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 558