NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday witnessed a heated exchange of words between the Centre and the Bengal government on the alleged misuse of the CBI, with the Centre saying the state’s plea was an attempt to scuttle investigations and the latter arguing that the probes conducted by the central agency on its territory without its consent violated the federal structure.
Appearing before a bench of Justices B R Gavai and Aravind Kumar, which was hearing a suit filed by the Bengal government against the Centre, solicitor general Tushar Mehta said it was not maintainable as the relief was sought against CBI probes but the central government had no control over it as the agency was independent and autonomous.
The state, which in 2018 withdrew general consent for the CBI, sought a declaration from the court that the agency had no jurisdiction to enter its territory to probe a case without taking its approval on a case-to-case basis. Mehta said allowing the state’s plea would amount to quashing all orders of constitutional courts which directed CBI probes.
Suit is inherently not maintainable at all. The government and DoPT have nothing to do with the registration of a case by the CBI, probe and prosecution of a case. The CBI is an independent agency and we have no control and superintendence over it. DoPT does not supervise or control CBI. It is not a limb of the government and it is a separate statutory entity, supervised by another statutory body (CVC),” Tushar Mehta said, adding that most cases probed by the CBI in West Bengal were on the directions of the apex court and the Calcutta High Court.
Mehta questioned the motive of the state for filing a suit which claimed to seek relief against the Centre but in reality was against the agency. He also contended that a suit under Article 131 of the Constitution could not be filed against an agency like CBI.
The SG said there was deliberate and mischievous suppression of facts by the state which amounted to playing fraud on the court and urged the bench to dismiss the plea.
Countering Mehta’s arguments, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said the Centre should not use such harsh words against the state and told the bench that the state had no problem with CBI probes done on the direction of the court and it had just sought a declaration from the SC that the agency could not probe other cases without its consent. Sibal said the issue of the CBI’s jurisdiction had to be adjudicated or the agency would become like the Enforcement Directorate and would lodge cases and arrest people across the country.