- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Raps CBI For Delay In...
Supreme Court Raps CBI For Delay In Filing Appeal; Asks New Director To Ensure Timely Filings
Mehal Jain
23 July 2021 8:08 AM GMT
"The new CBI Director must ensure that there is some sort of monitoring mechanism to ensure such delays don't happen in the future"
The Supreme Court on Friday directed that the CBI must take necessary steps to ensure that delays do not occur in the future in the filing of appeals and other steps in law, observing that the delays on the part of its officers in doing so within stipulated time gives rise to "grave misgivings" as regards the reasons of delay.The bench of Justices D. Y. Chandrachud and M. R....
The Supreme Court on Friday directed that the CBI must take necessary steps to ensure that delays do not occur in the future in the filing of appeals and other steps in law, observing that the delays on the part of its officers in doing so within stipulated time gives rise to "grave misgivings" as regards the reasons of delay.
The bench of Justices D. Y. Chandrachud and M. R. Shah required that the CBI Director take necessary administrative steps to ensure that the filing of appeals and other steps in law is monitored on an ICT platform.
The bench was considering an SLP filed by the Union of India against a judgment dated June 26, 2019 of the High Court by which the November, 2012 decision of the Special Judge, CBI, Raipur convicting the respondents under sections 120B, 420, 471 r/w 468 of the IPC and section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act was reversed and the respondents were acquitted.
The bench noted that there is a delay of 647 days on the part of the Union of India in filing the SLP and the application for condonation of delay does not give any reasonable explanation for the same.
The bench expressed that the explanation of COVID, as sought to be advanced, cannot be accepted for the entire period of delay as the HC judgments was passed much before the onset of the pandemic in March, 2020.
"In such cases where there has been an acquittal, we have to give due regard to the nature of explanation offered for the delay to ascertain whether a case for condonation is made out or not", said the bench.
ASG Aishwarya Bhati, while conceding that the Union is remissed by the delay, had urged the bench to consider the matter on merits- "It is a case of forgery and embezzlement. It is a case under the PC Act! Please look at the clinching facts of the case!"
"If it was such a serious matter, why was a prompt action not taken in filing this appeal? This is the modus operandi- your officers connived with the respondents to not file the appeal!", commented Justice Shah.
"Look at the nature of the case. There was conviction by the trial court but an acquittal by the HC. We also have to do justice to the other side", added Justice Chandrachud.
"We must impress upon the government that if there is no prompt action, an adverse inference can be drawn that the Limitation Act was overlooked deliberately!", continued Justice Shah.
"The new CBI Director must ensure that there is some sort of monitoring mechanism to ensure such delays don't happen in the future. The regional units may decide against filing an appeal and have to be monitored", said Justice Chandrachud.
Next Story
