 "Of those who rendered CBI unlawful")
On Wednesday, a bench of the Gauhati High Court, comprising judges Iqbal Ahmed Ansari and Indira Shah, set aside the "impugned" resolution dated April 1, 1963, through which the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had been constituted. The judgment practically rendered CBI as an unconstitutional body.
Profile of the judges:
Iqbal Ahmed Ansari: Son of a legal luminary, Ansari was born in Tezpur (Assam) in 1954. He joined the Assam Judicial Service in April 1991 and served as district and sessions judge. In June 1999, he joined the Gauhati High Court Registry. Subsequently, he was elevated to the post of judge.
On Friday, he was transferred to Patna as judge of the Patna High Court there.
Past judgments: In 2005, Ansari had pronounced an important judgment, allowing a minor rape victim to terminate her pregnancy. Though a medical examination confirmed rape, doctors had refused to terminate the pregnancy, saying the matter was "sub judice".
Source: Central Bureau of Investigation
After the parents of the victim approached a court of a sub-judicial magistrate, the petition was dismissed. Later, they approached the Gauhati High Court. Terming the case "unusual", Ansari asked the superintendent of the Gauhati Medical College and Hospital to terminate the minor girl's pregnancy, saying if this wasn't done, it would cause "grave injury to her mental health".
In 2010, Ansari, after hearing a writ petition, stayed the Assam governor's order on suspension of the NC Hills Autonomous Council in Assam (then in the news for a multi-crore scam), and the declaration of a special session of the NC Hills Autonomous Council as illegal.
Indira Shah: Born in 1954, Indira Shah was enrolled as an advocate in 1978. She joined the Assam Judicial Service in 1980 and worked in various capacities, across districts. Before she was appointed registrar general of the Gauhati High Court on November 1, 2011, she was a district judge in Jorhat and Kamrup. On March 2, 2012, she was appointed additional judge of the Gauhati High Court.
Wednesday's judgment was possibly her most important one so far.
Petitioner:
The petitioner, Navendra Kumar, is a resident of Delhi. He was a Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd employee in 2001, when CBI registered a case against him under Section 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in the office of the superintendent of police, CBI, in Silchar (Assam).
After investigating the case, CBI presented a chargesheet on November 25, 2004, in the court of the special judge, CBI, Guwahati.
In 2005, Kumar filed a writ petition in the Gauhati High Court, questioning the constitutional validity of the formation of the CBI and its powers to carry out functions of the police - registering a first information report (FIR), under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; arresting a person as an accused; investigation of offences; filing of charge sheets against alleged offenders; and prosecuting them were challenged.
Kumar had asked the court to "quash the impugned Resolution No. 4/31/61-T, dated 01-04-1963, as ultra vires the Constitution of India, by way of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and (ii) quash the criminal proceeding/prosecution originated from the FIR/RC No. 39(A)/2001/CBI/SIL pending against the petitioner in the court of special judge (CBI) for Assam at Guwahati, by way of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari".
In 2007, a single judge dismissed his petition, following which he filed a writ appeal in the high court in 2008.
A judgment on this was pronounced by the court on November 6. However, while terming CBI as "unconstitutional" and quashing the chargesheet against the petitioner submitted by CBI, the court said that wouldn't bar further investigation by the police with jurisdiction over the subject matter.
Profile of the judges:
Iqbal Ahmed Ansari: Son of a legal luminary, Ansari was born in Tezpur (Assam) in 1954. He joined the Assam Judicial Service in April 1991 and served as district and sessions judge. In June 1999, he joined the Gauhati High Court Registry. Subsequently, he was elevated to the post of judge.
On Friday, he was transferred to Patna as judge of the Patna High Court there.
More From This Section
Past judgments: In 2005, Ansari had pronounced an important judgment, allowing a minor rape victim to terminate her pregnancy. Though a medical examination confirmed rape, doctors had refused to terminate the pregnancy, saying the matter was "sub judice".
| SOME PROMINENT CASES UNDER CBI |
|
After the parents of the victim approached a court of a sub-judicial magistrate, the petition was dismissed. Later, they approached the Gauhati High Court. Terming the case "unusual", Ansari asked the superintendent of the Gauhati Medical College and Hospital to terminate the minor girl's pregnancy, saying if this wasn't done, it would cause "grave injury to her mental health".
In 2010, Ansari, after hearing a writ petition, stayed the Assam governor's order on suspension of the NC Hills Autonomous Council in Assam (then in the news for a multi-crore scam), and the declaration of a special session of the NC Hills Autonomous Council as illegal.
Indira Shah: Born in 1954, Indira Shah was enrolled as an advocate in 1978. She joined the Assam Judicial Service in 1980 and worked in various capacities, across districts. Before she was appointed registrar general of the Gauhati High Court on November 1, 2011, she was a district judge in Jorhat and Kamrup. On March 2, 2012, she was appointed additional judge of the Gauhati High Court.
Wednesday's judgment was possibly her most important one so far.
Petitioner:
The petitioner, Navendra Kumar, is a resident of Delhi. He was a Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd employee in 2001, when CBI registered a case against him under Section 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in the office of the superintendent of police, CBI, in Silchar (Assam).
After investigating the case, CBI presented a chargesheet on November 25, 2004, in the court of the special judge, CBI, Guwahati.
In 2005, Kumar filed a writ petition in the Gauhati High Court, questioning the constitutional validity of the formation of the CBI and its powers to carry out functions of the police - registering a first information report (FIR), under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; arresting a person as an accused; investigation of offences; filing of charge sheets against alleged offenders; and prosecuting them were challenged.
Kumar had asked the court to "quash the impugned Resolution No. 4/31/61-T, dated 01-04-1963, as ultra vires the Constitution of India, by way of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and (ii) quash the criminal proceeding/prosecution originated from the FIR/RC No. 39(A)/2001/CBI/SIL pending against the petitioner in the court of special judge (CBI) for Assam at Guwahati, by way of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari".
In 2007, a single judge dismissed his petition, following which he filed a writ appeal in the high court in 2008.
A judgment on this was pronounced by the court on November 6. However, while terming CBI as "unconstitutional" and quashing the chargesheet against the petitioner submitted by CBI, the court said that wouldn't bar further investigation by the police with jurisdiction over the subject matter.