Disposed

Awadhesh Prasad Shukla v. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh HC16 Apr 2014WP/15186/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

VYAPAM examination irregularities prompted requests to transfer criminal investigations from STF to CBI. The Court refused transfer or appointment of SIT, disposed of the petitions, and directed separate suo motu proceedings for periodic monitoring. It also transferred further investigation of one charge-sheeted case to STF and accepted the State's assurance to entrust related cases to STF.

What did the court decide?

Separate suo motu proceedings ordered for monitoring STF investigations; further investigation of FIR No.523/2011 transferred to STF.

Awadhesh Prasad Shukla Vs the State of… — Education and Admissions | Madhya Pradesh HC (2014)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR

¶2

W.P. No. 15186/2013

¶3

Awadhesh Prasad Shukla

¶4

¶5

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶6

W.P. No.15404/2013

¶7

Vikrant Chourasia

¶8

¶9

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶10

W.P. No.20219/2013

¶11

Dasrath Bairagi Vs

¶12

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶13

W.P. No.21251/2013

¶14

Shri K.K. Mishra Vs

¶15

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶16

W.P. No.21318/2013

¶17

Ayushi Gupta Vs

¶18

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶19

W.P. No.21527/2013

¶20

Yogendra Singh Jadon Vs

¶21

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶22

W.P. No.21543/2013

¶23

Paras

¶24

¶25

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶26

W.P. No.21553/2013

¶27

Sushri Saloni Chopra

¶28

¶29

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

W.P. No.106/2014

Awadhesh Bhargawa Vs

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others W.P. No.293/2014

¶34

Gaurav Pandey Vs

¶35

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶36

W.P. No. 1449/2014

¶37

Umang Singhar and another Vs

¶38

The State of Madhya Pradesh and another

¶39

W.P. No.2232/2014

¶40

P.C.Sharma Vs

¶41

Union of India and others

¶42

W.P. No.2756/2014

¶43

Shrijan Ek Asha Vs

¶44

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶45

W.P. No. 4317/2014

¶46

Dr. Kamlesh Verma Vs

¶47

The State of Madhya Pradesh and others

¶48

====================================================

¶49

Coram

¶50

Hon’ble Shri Justice A. M. Khanwilkar, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Justice K.K. Trivedi, J.

¶51

Whether approved for reporting? Yes

¶52

------------------------------------------

¶53

Shri R.K. Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.15186/2013.

¶54

Shri Aditya Sanghi, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P.Nos.15404/2013 and 21318/20013.

¶55

Shri Amitabh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.20219/2013.

¶56

Shri Paritosh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.21251/2013. Shri G.P. Singh, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.21527/2013 (absent).

¶57

¶58

Shri Parag Chaturvedi, Advocate as Amicus Curiae in W.P . Nos.21553/2013. Shri Parag Chaturvedi, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.21543/2013.

¶59

Shri Prashant Chourasia, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.106/2014 (absent).

¶60

Shri Awdhesh Singh Bhadauria, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.293/2014 (absent).

¶61

Shri A.M. Trivedi, Senior Advocate with Shri Aseem Trivedi, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.1449/2014.

¶62

Shri Shekhar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.2232/2014. Shri K.T.S. Tulsi, Senior Advocate with Shri Kuber Bodh, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.2756/2014.

¶63

Shri Siddharth Seth, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.4317/2014. Shri Uday Lalit, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri P.K. Kaurav, Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State.

¶64

Shri Rashid Suhail Siddiqui, Advocate for the respondent-Union of India. Shri Vikram Singh and Shri Abhay Pandey, Advocate for the CBI in W.P. No.21251/2013.

¶65

====================================================

¶66

Reserved On : 02.04.2014 Date of Decision : 16.04.2014

¶67

O R D E R

¶68

{16^th April, 2014}

¶69

Per A.M. Khanwilkar, Chief Justice:

¶70

This judgment will answer one common question raised

¶71

in all these petitions regarding transfer of investigation of criminal

¶72

cases registered in connection with the irregularities in the examinations conducted by VYAPAM (M.P. Professional Examination Board). No other argument has been made by counsel for the petitioners in these cases, notwithstanding other reliefs claimed in some of the petitions.

¶73

2. We deem it appropriate to reproduce reliefs claimed in

¶74

¶75

the respective Writ Petitions under consideration:-

¶76

(A) In W.P. No.15186/2013, the petitioner has prayed for

¶77

following reliefs:

¶78

(i) It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue writ, order, direction and command to the respondents No.1 to 3, to cancel the PMT-2013 Test and be further pleased to direct them to conduct fresh MP PMT-2013 Exam.

¶79

(ii) That, the complete process of PMT-2013 for which the examination was held on 7/7/13 including the declaration of results kindly be quashed.

¶80

(iii) That, respondents 1 to 5 be directed to conduct fresh PMT-2013 Exam or to complete the admission process for the year 2013 based upon marks/score of NEET-2013.

¶81

(iv) The wrong doers be punished in accordance with law of due enquiry by CBI in public interest.

¶82

(v) Any other relief which may be deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court may kindly be granted in favour of petitioner.

¶83

(vi) That, the respondent No.6 & 7 may kindly be asked to substantiate their media coverage in question in Public Interest to bring the truth before the Nation.

¶84

(vii) Petition be allowed with cost.

¶85

(B) In W.P. No.15404/2013 the petitioner has prayed for

¶86

following reliefs:

¶87

i. Mandamus commanding the respondents/ concerned authorities to identify the fake students and not to allow them a seat of MBBS course in either Government medical college or in private medical college in the State of Madhya Pradesh.

¶88

ii. Mandamus commanding the respondents to prepare and issue a fresh merit list excluding

¶89

¶90

the fake and fictitious students and to conduct counselling on the basis of such fresh merit list and allot the seats of MBBS as per the merit position in the fresh merit list.

¶91

iii. Mandamus commanding the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe into the matter.

¶92

iv. Mandamus commanding the respondents/ concerned authorities to initiate criminal proceedings against fake candidates as well as those students who got selected illegally with aid from such fake candidates.

¶93

v. Any other appropriate writ, order, or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be passed.

¶94

(C) In W.P. No.20219/2013, the petitioner has prayed for

¶95

following reliefs:

¶96

i. Investigate the matter of fraud in the PMT examination since 1997 and take appropriate act against the illegal beneficiaries, of the said fraud.

¶97

ii. Register offence against the invigilators posted at the respective examination centres where the accused students have committed the crime of copying with the help of other co-accused persons engaged in facilitating copying, by the beneficiary students, for monetary benefits.

¶98

iii. Register offence against all the members of the examination committee of respondent No.3 and other officers of the respondent No.3 board responsible for fair conduct of the examinations conducted by it.

¶99

iv. Any other relief which the Hon’ble Court deems appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the matter.

¶100

( D) In W.P. No.21251/2013, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:

¶101

(i) To issue a appropriate writ directing the respondents not to transfer Mr. Sudhir Shahi

¶102

¶103

the Chief of S.T.F.

¶104

(ii) To issue a appropriate writ directing the respondents to report this matter to the Income Tax Department so that the aforesaid money can be recovered.

¶105

(iii) To issue a appropriate writ directing the respondents to involve the C.B.I. to co-ordinate with the S.T.F. to bring in the culprit behind the bars.

¶106

(iv) To issue a appropriate writ directing the respondents to enquire into the matter regarding the number of students which is more than 20 in numbers in every private medical colleges that why take admissions, block seats and only on the last date cancelled their admissions and whether the same students are doing it in the previous years also and are their studying in any medical colleges.

¶107

(v) To issue a appropriate writ directing the respondents to reduce the equal number of seats from their quota seats and be given to the State quota seats by way of punishment as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Mradul Dhar’s case.

¶108

(vi) To issue a appropriate writ directing the respondents to give admissions in the next academic year to all those students who were deserving their admissions and because of the illegalities of the authorities they were restrained from taking admissions although deserving and meritorious.

¶109

(vii) That, it is prayed before this Hon’ble Court to kindly link this matter along with a case which was pending at the Hon’ble High Court bench at Indore W.P. No.9827/2013 (P.I.L.) (Paras V/s State of M.P. & others) which is now being transfer to the Principal Seat.

¶110

(viii) To grant any other relief deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶111

(E) In W.P. No.21318/2013, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:

¶112

¶113

i. mandamus commanding Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe into the matter.

¶114

ii. mandamus commanding the respondent No.3 to produce entire record of the year 2012 as well as 2013 before this Hon’ble Court to find how many students have been cheated through exchange of OMR Mark-sheets and if it is found that several students like the petitioner have been cheated, then heavy damages be given to those candidates who deserves a seat of MBBS but they have been denied due to corruption prevalent in the State of Madhya Pradesh.

¶115

iii. mandamus commanding the respondents to investigate all admissions made in Govt. medical colleges in the year 2012.

¶116

iv. Any other appropriate writ, order, or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be passed.

¶117

(F) Writ Petition No. 21527/2013 was filed before Bench at Indore on 03/06/2013, which stood transferred by administrative

¶118

order to the Principal Seat at Jabalpur, to be heard along with companion cases involving similar reliefs. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:

¶119

i. To constitute a High power committee to look in to the entire matter or the present matter be handed over to the Central Investigating Agencies namely CBI or any other Independent Investigating Agency.

¶120

ii. And to declare the VYAPAM as blacklisted agency since a large number of cases has come to the fore where it can be gathered that the system has turned corrupt.

¶121

iii. And to direct/restrict the Respondent No.4 not to conduct any other examination in the manner and method it had conducted the aforesaid examination.

¶122

¶123

iv. And/or to cancel the said MPPMT examination and entire procedure and entirely new program for the said examination be prepared and executed upon the fair and transparent policy and norms.

¶124

v. Any other relief, which the Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, be granted to the petitioner.

¶125

(G) Writ Petition No.21543/2013 was also filed before Bench

¶126

at Indore on 13/08/2013, which stood transferred by administrative order to the Principal Seat at Jabalpur, to be heard along with companion cases involving similar reliefs. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:

¶127

i. To direct Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe into the matter.

¶128

ii. To the respondent/ concerned authorities to initiate criminal proceedings against all the culprits involved in the aforesaid racket.

¶129

iii. To the respondents/ concerned authorities to initiate criminal proceedings against fake candidates as well as those students who got selected illegally with aid from such fake candidates.

¶130

iv. Further to expel those students from, colleges who have got their selection illegally and to disqualify those doctors who were selected on the aforesaid illegal basis and have obtained there degrees and are practicing.

¶131

v. To complete the investigation pending since years against the fake candidates as mentioned in aforesaid annexure.

¶132

vi. To cancel the said MPPMT examination, 2013 as the result has not been declared till date and to conduct fresh examination fairly upon transparent policy and norms.

¶133

vii. Any other relief, which the Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, be granted to the petitioner.

¶134

¶135

(H) Writ Petition No.21553/2013 was filed before Bench at

¶136

Indore on 12/08/2013, which stood transferred by administrative order to the Principal Seat at Jabalpur, to be heard along with companion cases involving similar reliefs. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:

¶137

i. �� !��"� �� #�� $%��&��'�� (�)��*��+��,�-.��,�� /�0'��/��,��!�

¶138

ii. ��1��2�'��(��)��- � �� /�3�� 4��5�� /�3�� (��&�� '�� 6��7��8��,��9��-��60�� /�0'��/��,��!�

¶139

iii. ��7�� )��0&�� ,( � �� )�� &�� 5��,�� :,�0�� (�9� � � � ��;<��,��9��)/*��=�8�� /��,�� /�0'��/�� ,��!�

¶140

iv. ��7�� 1��#��:,�0�� /�3�� (��1�� //��(�"��,�� /�0'��/��,��!�

¶141

v. ��1�� : � ��* � 2� :� � � � ��)�� ,� � :,�0�� ;��;>9�?��,��9��,��!�

¶142

(I) In W.P. No.106/2014, the petitioner has prayed for

¶143

following reliefs:

¶144

(i) By issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.1 to 3 to conduct CBI investigation against each and every exam conducted by the Vyapam since 2003.

¶145

(ii) By issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 & 3 to arrest the respondent No.5 and each & every persons also who is involve in the selection

¶146

¶147

illegalities & irregularities conducted by the Vyapam.

¶148

(iii) Any other writ direction or orders which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶149

(iv) Costs of the proceedings.

¶150

(J) Writ Petition No.293/2014 was filed before Bench at

¶151

Gwalior on 05/12/2013, which stood transferred by administrative order to the Principal Seat at Jabalpur, to be heard along with companion cases involving similar reliefs. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:

¶152

i. �� @��4��0�+�� / � '��,�� 8+�0� ���� A�� 0 � � �� ��,�� B��5�� - � �� 9�� /��)� � �+�� =�8�� (�(/0��,�� !�

¶153

ii. ��@��4��0�+�� / � '��,�� �� STF �.��,��9�� /*��)� � �+��=�8�� (�(/0��,�� !�

¶154

iii. ��1��+ �� 8+�0�"��:�� C 6��1�� (>��$�$#�� ,�� '�� 5�� ;�9��/�'�D��/�0'��/��,�� !��

¶155

iv. ��)�� ,� � 5��;�9�� /�'�D��/�0'��,�� ,�� !��

¶156

(K) In W.P. No.1449/2014, the petitioner has prayed for

¶157

following reliefs:

¶158

i. The Hon’ble Court may kindly direct the CBI to investigate the VYAPAM scam in the interest of justice.

¶159

ii. That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly issue any other appropriate writ or directions in the interest of justice.

¶160

(L) In W.P. No.2232/2014, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs :

¶161

¶162

i. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be please to sent for the record pertaining to entire scam and steps taken by the Special Task Force, other Government Departments/agencies of the State of Madhya Pradesh, dealing with the said scam.

¶163

ii. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be please to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.1 to undertake investigation with respect to Pre-Medical Test entrance examination (PMT) from 2009 till 2013.

¶164

iii. Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deemed just and proper in view of aforesaid facts and grounds may kindly be allowed in favour of petitioner.

¶165

(M) In W.P. No.2756/2014, the petitioner has prayed for

¶166

following reliefs:

¶167

i. It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation to investigate into illegal admissions granted in Medical Entrance Test since 2008 till date.

¶168

ii. It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the CBI, to investigate into the appointments given to Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-I, II and III since 2008 till date.

¶169

iii. It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the CBI to conduct investigation into all government appointments made by VYAPAM.

¶170

iv. It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the State Government to forthwith terminate the services of 1000 persons (as admitted by the Hon’ble Chief Minister) who have been illegally appointed and further action be taken against the guilty officers as well as the guilty persons who secured forged appointments since 2007 till date.

¶171

¶172

v. It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondent Medical Council of India to forthwith withdraw licences to the Doctors who secured admissions illegally in MBBS Courses and Post Graduation Courses.

¶173

vi. That the State Government may kindly be directed to dissolve Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (VYAPAM).

¶174

vii. Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.

¶175

viii. Award costs of this petition in favour of the petitioner.

¶176

(N) In W.P. No.4317/2014, the petitioner has prayed for

¶177

following reliefs:

¶178

i. Issue a Writ, order or direction in nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the C.B.I. to initiate an investigation into the manner Professional Examination Board (VYAPAM) has been deeply involved in this scam by the officials of the VYAPAM, politicians and businessman.

¶179

ii. Issue a Writ, order or direction in nature of Mandamu s or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to C.B.I. to conduct its inquiry in a time bound manner and also to suggest ways in order to ensure that such scam cannot take place in future.

¶180

iii. In the alternative appoint an Independent Commission headed by a Legal Luminary and other experts to investigate into this SCAM.

¶181

iv. Any other relief/s, order/s, direction/s, this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case may also be allowed in favour of the petitioner.

¶182

3 . The prayer for transfer of investigation of concerned criminal cases is primarily on the basis of apprehension that the

¶183

¶184

Special Task Force (hereinafter referred to as “the STF”) constituted by the State Government to investigate these cases is only a farce. The STF will shield the resourceful persons including high officials, Government officials and political leaders.

¶185

4 . (i) Shri K.T.S. Tulsi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P. No.2756/2014 opened the arguments for the petitioners. He submitted that inspite of copious material on record to indicate commission of offence under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act by the public servants, no offence under that Act has been registered nor any public servant is proceeded in that behalf. This has been done to shield the high officials. On the other hand, the investigation is directed against the students, who have become victims of the alleged conspiracy by the racketeers. This is being done only to pressurize the students so that they may not speak against high officials.

¶186

(ii) He submits that the petitioners are not expected to substantiate their apprehension but it is good enough for them to demonstrate from the circumstances emerging from the record that they are justified in entertaining reasonable apprehension, which, by itself, should be a good ground to transfer the investigation to any other independent Agency such as Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as “the CBI”).

¶187

(iii) He submits that the investigation by the STF so far

¶188

¶189

indicates that senior police officers have been named as accused in some of the FIRs. It also reveals involvement of Officer on Special Duty to Governor of State of Madhya Pradesh and other high officials and member of personal staff of the Chief Minister. It is indisputable, contends learned counsel, that the investigation is also in respect of involvement of daughter of Inspector General of Police. He submits that deliberate flaws are being kept during investigation by STF, firstly of not registering FIR for the relevant offences though clearly made out, coupled with the fact that no stringent action is being taken against the senior police officers named as accused. In that, they have not been arrested so far. Nay, not even interrogated. Moreover, even after material indicating the involvement of ExMinister has become available, the STF has not taken any action against him.

¶190

(iv) He submits that the students who have been named as accused, at best could be witnesses against the scamsters, but, they are being proceeded as if they are the principal accused and because of whom the mass scale manipulations in the concerned examinations could happen.

¶191

(v) The investigation is only against the lower functionaries and insignificant public servants and not against persons holding high offices. The STF has so far succeeded in its design to not record the statement of such high officials and political leaders for reasons best known to it.

¶192

¶193

(vi) In the alternative, he submitted that if the Court is of the opinion that the CBI should not be burdened with the investigation of this matter, the Court may consider of constituting special investigating team of independent eminent persons, who will report to the Court. He submits that the thrust of the petitioners is not to cause any embarrassment to STF but request the Court to ensure that truth should not become casualty because of imperfect investigation done by the STF. At the conclusion of the hearing of these matters, we had given opportunity to the counsel for the petitioners to file written submissions within two days, if they so desired. However, no written submission has been filed after the case was reserved for hearing.

¶194

(vii) In support of his submissions he placed reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Gurucharan Dass Chadha vs. State of Rajasthan¹ (para 13), Maneka Sanjay Gandhi vs. Rani Jethmalani² (para 2 and 5), State of Maharashtra vs. Farook Mohammed Mapkar and others³ (para 68), State of Punjab vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar⁴ (para 75), Rajender Singh Pathania and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and others⁵ (para 14), Disha vs. State of Gujarat and others⁶ (para 7, 21 and

¶195

1 AIR 1966 SC 1418

¶196

2 (1979) 4 SCC 167

¶197

3 (2010) 3 SCC 571

¶198

4

¶199

(2011) 14 SCC 770

¶200

5 (2011) 13 SCC 329

¶201

6 (2011) 13 SCC 337

¶202

¶203

25), Narmada Bai vs. State of Gujarat⁷ (para 27, 63, 64 and 69), Vikas Kumar Roorkewal vs. State of Uttarakhand and others⁸ (para 23), Prof. K.V. Rajendran vs. Superintendent of Police, CBCID South Zone, Chennai and others⁹ (para 6, 7 and 10), and Manohar Lal Sharma vs. Principal Secretary and others¹⁰ (para 38 to 40, 50, 61 and 94).

¶204

5 . (i) W.P. No. 21553/2013 was filed by the petitioners in person. The Court, with the consent of the said petitioners, appointed Shri Parag Chaturvedi, learned counsel as amicus curiae to espouse their cause. In W.P. No.21543/2013, Shri Parag Chaturvedi has instructions to appear from the petitioner therein. Shri Parag Chaturvedi submitted that the petitioners being public representatives are concerned about the manner in which the investigation of such a sensitive matter and having wide ramifications is being handled by the STF.

¶205

(ii) He submitted that from the affidavit of Dilraj Singh Baghel, Deputy Superintendent of Police, who is the Investigating Officer of STF, it is evident that he has virtually conceded that it may not be possible to investigate crime committed prior to 2011 on the specious plea that no data has been saved by the

¶206

VYAPAM. This raises doubt about the competency of the said investigation, if not of credibility. Inasmuch as, the said investigating

¶207

7 (2011) 5 SCC 79 8

¶208

(2011) 2 SCC 178

¶209

9

¶210

(2013) 12 SCC 480

¶211

10 (2014) 2 SCC 532

¶212

¶213

officer has made no further attempt to untangle the crime committed prior to 2012.

¶214

(iii) He further submits that, indisputably, STF is under the control of State Government. That justifies the apprehension of the petitioners that the investigation will not be free and fair. This apprehension is reinforced as the investigation is progressing at a snail’s pace, though the FIR has been registered on 7.7.2013.

¶215

(iv) Moreover, no attempt whatsoever has been made to investigate the admissions given in private colleges.

¶216

(v) He submits that the petitioners verily believe that STF has not even bothered to collect the call details of students, parents or VYAPAM officials so far. This is indicative of the fact that free and fair investigation will be a casualty, resulting in travesty of justice. He reiterated the prayer to transfer the investigation to an independent Agency such as CBI.

¶217

6. (i) Shri Aditya Sanghi, learned counsel appeared for the petitioners in W.P. No.21318/2013 and 15404/2013. The former petition pertains to crime committed during the examination conducted by VYAPAM in 2012 and the latter pertains to offences in connection with examination conducted by VYAPAM in 2013.

¶218

(ii) He submits that the petitioner had made complaint about the irregularities committed in the said examination, as a result of which the petitioner has become victim in spite of having exceptional academic record. However, no action has been taken on

¶219

¶220

that complaint and that too in spite of this Court’s order dated 6^th May, 2013.

¶221

(iii) In W.P. No.15404/2013 no allegations are found against the present Investigating Team (STF) as this petition was filed before the constitution of STF. He, however, submits that it is necessary to appoint an independent Investigating Agency such as CBI, considering the fact that the crime in question transcends beyond the boundaries of State of Madhya Pradesh. STF may not be in a position to deal with those matters. The same can be effectively dealt with by CBI. Therefore, even these petitioners pray that the investigation be transferred to CBI. He has placed reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in Disha (supra) (para 21) and Farook Mohammed Mapkar (supra) (para 16 and 17).

¶222

7 . (i) Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel appearing in W.P. No.2232/2014, in addition, submitted that from the recently filed FIR (Crime No.19/2013) on 7^th December, 2013, the involvement of Ex-Minister in the crime is palpable. He has been named as accused.

¶223

(ii) The news item appearing in Times of India dated 21^st December, 2013 also reveals involvement of political persons having huge clout in the Government such as Uma Bharti. It also reveals that the Director General of Police, for reasons best known to him, approached Uma Bharti to console her and was found to be very submissive. The Director General of Police is the highest official and

¶224

¶225

if he is seen obliging heavy weight political leaders, it is obvious that STF will act under dictation and not undertake free and fair investigation. This is a strong circumstance why the investigation should be transferred to an independent Agency not under the control of the present Government.

¶226

(iii) He has also invited our attention to the news item appeared in Times of India dated 10^th February, 2014 mentioning that the Ex-Minister Laxmikant Sharma was likely to be arrested but, contends that that has not happened till date for inexplicable reasons. The news item mentions about involvement of four BJP leaders, including, three Ministers as suspects , but no follow up action has been taken by the STF, which creates serious doubt about their approach.

¶227

(iv) Reliance is also placed on the news item in Times of India dated 12^th February, 2014 (page 14). It is mentioned that the aide of Ex-Minister has admitted his role and the possibility of involvement of many other political leaders.

¶228

(v) Our attention was also invited to news item dated 13^th February, 2014 (page 10) to contend that no investigation has been done in respect of the clue given in this news item that 38 forms were submitted online from one common web portal at Kanpur. This news item is based on the information given by a hacker. No explanation is forthcoming as to why STF has not made such attempt on its own so far as it is a crucial information to pin down the

¶229

¶230

offenders and to proceed against them.

¶231

(vi) He has placed reliance on the decisions of Apex

¶232

Court in Sanjiv Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others¹¹ (para 15), Nirmal Singh Kahlon vs. State of Punjab and others¹² (para 23 and 34) and State of West Bengal and others vs. The Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and others¹³ (para 68 to 70).

¶233

(vii) In the rejoinder-reply, however, learned counsel in all fairness submitted that the petitioner was not questioning the credentials of STF as such. Nevertheless, from the circumstances pointed out by him it was evident that the petitioners were justified in entertaining reasonable apprehension that the investigation by STF will not be free and fair. He additionally relied on the decision of Apex Court in Nirmal Singh Kahlon (supra) (para 34).

¶234

8 . (i) Shri Siddharth Seth, learned counsel appearing in W.P. No.4317/2014, in addition, submitted that the role of the State must be that of parens patriae. The State must be serious about such criminal activities polluting the entire educational system and having cascading effect on the common man and their aspirations.

¶235

(ii) According to him, non-arrest of Laxmikant

¶236

Sharma, Ex-Minister, in spite of sufficient material to indicate his complicity in the commission of the crime, is inexplicable. That

¶237

11 (2005) 5 SCC 517 12 (2009) 1 SCC 441 13 (2010) 3 SCC 571

¶238

¶239

creates doubt about the approach of the STF.

¶240

(iii) He submits that the STF consists of only 82

¶241

officials who have been made responsible for investigation of a crime which has wide spread tentacles.

¶242

(iv) The STF as has been created, is completely under the control of State and, therefore, there is no likelihood of free and fair investigation by that Agency.

¶243

(v) He invited our attention to the statement of Dr. Jagdish Sagar recorded by the Investigating Agency, which is part of one of the charge-sheet filed against the accused in the crime, to buttress his point, that high officials and heavy weight political persons are kept out of the loop by the STF.

¶244

(vi) He submits that although the entire activity resulting in commission of crime was Online and dependent on technology, no attempt has been made by STF to constitute its own team of technical persons having in-depth knowledge of the technology and computer operations. Instead, the STF has opted to outsource that activity. This itself speaks volumes about the competence of the STF and their seriousness of investigation of such a sensitive crime.

¶245

(vii) He has relied on the decisions of the Apex Court in Secretary, Minor Irrigation and Rural Engineering Services, U.P.

¶246

¶247

v. Sahngoo Ram Arya¹⁴ � (para 6) and Committee for Protection of

¶248

Democratic Rights (supra) (para 17) to buttress his prayer for transfer of investigation to CBI.

¶249

(viii) In the rejoinder argument he submitted that the petitioner is not required to substantiate his apprehension but it is enough for him to show prima facie case from the circumstances already pointed out to justify the prayer for transfer of investigation to CBI. Learned counsel wanted to rely on new facts during the rejoinder argument, which we did not permit as the respondents could not be taken by surprise after their arguments were already over.

¶250

(ix) He then submitted that there has been deliberate delay in registration of the FIR. In that, Expert’s report was available on 25^th October, 2013, whereas the FIR has been registered on 20^th November, 2013 and 23^rd November, 2013 for reasons best known to the Agency.

¶251

(x) He also questioned the timing of registration of FIR on 7^th December, 2013. According to him, that was done by the STF to avoid embarrassment to Ex-Minister who was contesting the election and poll was scheduled on 6^th December, 2013.

¶252

9 . Shri Amitabh Gupta, learned counsel appearing in W.P. No.20219/2013, additionally submitted that no case against Invigilators and Supervisors, who were in attendance in the

¶253

14 AIR 2002 SC 2225 = (2002) 5 SCC 521

¶254

¶255

concerned examination centers from where the students are accused of having indulged in unfair means during the examination, has been instituted. Further, no investigation about their involvement has been done. The STF ought to investigate all angles, which the STF has failed to do thus far. Even for this reason, contends learned counsel, it is a fit case to transfer the investigation to CBI.

¶256

10 . (i) Shri A.M. Trivedi, learned senior counsel appearing in Writ Petition No.1449/2014 submitted that the petitioners were public representatives and were deeply concerned, as much as the concern of common man across the State about the manner of investigation done by the STF.

¶257

(ii) He submitted that the Government was fully aware about the problem since at least year 2009. The Government did not take any initiative whatsoever, because it was aware about the involvement of high officials and political leaders, including the Ministers in the Government.

¶258

(iii) He invited our attention to letter dated 29^th October, 2009 (Annexure P/7) written by Dean, Medical College to the Board mentioning about irregularities committed during the examination conducted by VYAPAM. The Government by executive order decided to constitute Verification Committee to enquire into that complaint, as can be discerned from Annexure P/4. However, no action was taken by this Committee, even against known nine candidates. The first meeting of that Committee, however, was

¶259

¶260

convened only on 25^th June, 2010. This was done to cover up the episode which had come to light and as mentioned in the communication sent by the Dean, Medical College. Notably, the issue was also raised in the Legislative Assembly on 31^st March, 2011, when the Chief Minister gave his reply admitting the fact that similar irregularities have been committed in the past during the examinations conducted by VYAPAM from 2007 onwards. He misled the Assembly by stating that no student has been identified, which was contrary to the facts emerging from the communication of Dean, Medical College and, in particular, the action of the State in constituting Verification Committee for that very purpose at least against nine candidates.

¶261

(iv) He invited our attention to Annexure R/6, being letter dated 4^th March, 2014, sent by the Director, Medical Education to A.I.G. (M.P.) with reference to the incidents of 2009 and 2010 in respect of which FIR has been registered.

¶262

(v) Our attention was invited to letter dated 26^th July, 2010, and the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee dated 25^th June, 2010, 28^th January, 2011 and 7^th April, 2011 which mention about the possible involvement of 25 and 37 students respectively, because of mismatch of photographs. He submits that no progress has been done in respect of the FIR already registered, thereby causing anguish amongst the public at large and trust deficit about the investigation undertaken by the STF.

¶263

¶264

(vi) He submits that the FIR registered on 7^th July, 2013 at about 9.25 hrs in respect of examination which was to commence at 12.00 noon on the same day reveals the magnitude of the crime and the organized manner of indulging in unfair means during the examination.

¶265

(vii) Although the STF was constituted by the State Government on 26^th August, 2013 and took over the investigation, initially it did its job properly, but, in due course when disclosure of names of high officials and political leaders came to light, the investigation is being misdirected. He submits that the STF is under complete control of the State Government and for which reason there is reasonable apprehension in the minds of not only the petitioners but also amongst the common public that it will not be able to conduct free and fair investigation.

¶266

(viii) He submits that it is not possible for the petitioners to produce direct evidence about the partisan approach of the STF or about their inaction. That will have to be discerned from the circumstances such as involvement of high officials, politicians and the submissive attitude of the Director General of Police noted in the Press reports. No other conclusion is possible except that the investigation by the STF will not be sincere, honest, free and fair.

¶267

(ix) He relied on the stand taken by the STF mentioned in the reply affidavit that there is no motivation amongst the Investigating Team of STF. It is only recording statements and not

¶268

¶269

making any other effort to unravel the crime and the manner in which it was planned and successfully executed.

¶270

(x) He has invited our attention to the proceedings of

¶271

the Legislative Assembly to contend that the Government is not sincere in unravelling the truth and taking the investigation to its logical end because of the involvement of members of the political party in power.

¶272

(xi) He placed reliance on the case of Vishwanath Chaturvedi (3) Vs. Union of India and others¹⁵ (paragraphs 35 to 38) and Nirmal Singh Kahlon (supra) (paragraph 28 and 36) in support of his submission that it is a fit case for transferring the investigation to C.B.I.

¶273

(xii) Shri Trivedi during the rejoinder argument while dealing with the recent judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Muzaffarnagar episode, submitted that there was difference in the two situations. In the present case, there is indisputable material on record indicating the involvement of high officials and political leaders, in particular belonging to the party in power, for which reason, to ensure free and fair investigation, the same should be entrusted to an independent Investigating Agency such as C.B.I.

¶274

(xiii) He alternatively submitted that, in any case, in the larger public interest, this Court itself should monitor the

¶275

15 (2007) 4 SCC 380

¶276

¶277

investigation. In all fairness, he submitted that he was not opposed to investigation by STF, but, in that case the Court ought to monitor the investigation to instil confidence in public about free and fair investigation.

¶278

11. Shri R.K. Thakur, learned counsel appearing in Writ Petition No.15186/2013 has adopted the arguments made by the previous advocates. Additionally, he has placed reliance on the case of State of West Bengal and others vs. Sampat Lal and others¹⁶ (paragraphs 13 to 15 and 33).

¶279

12 . In Writ Petition Nos. 21527/2013, 21251/2013, 106/2014 and 293/2014, no counsel addressed us separately. Therefore, we assume that they have adopted the arguments already made on behalf of the petitioners in other matters.

¶280

13. (i) Shri Uday Lalit, learned senior counsel, at the outset, submitted that the respondents were not considering this issue as an adversarial litigation. Further, the respondents should not be misunderstood for having responded to the issues raised by the petitioners and taken adversarial position.

¶281

(ii) He submitted that apprehensions entertained by the petitioners singularly or, for that matter, taken together, can be no justification to transfer the investigation to any other Agency especially when STF consists of experienced, impartial and independent police officials who are fully equipped to deal with the

¶282

16 AIR 1985 SC 195

¶283

¶284

organized crimes, such as the present one.

¶285

(iii) He submitted that none of the petitioners have doubted the credibility of any official of STF much less of the entire team of STF, except pointing out some circumstances which will have to be considered in the context of the independent structure of STF and the effort already put in by the Investigating Team as a result of which offences committed in the past have also come to light and in respect of which steps have been taken by registration of fresh FIRs and investigating the same.

¶286

(iv) He submits that the present STF team is dealing singularly with offences concerning examinations conducted by VYAPAM and is not engaged in any other work. It is a fully dedicated team to investigate those offences.

¶287

(v) After its constitution, consequent to investigation, the STF has registered new cases and, including in relation to the possible involvement of high officials and political leaders. Those offences are being investigated in right earnest. If the STF had intention to shield any person, there was no reason to register new offences and to bring on record statements indicating the complicity of high officials and political leaders.

¶288

(vi) He submits that in absence of any semblance of material to suggest that even one official of the STF is bias, there is no reason either to doubt the credibility of the STF or for that matter about its sincerity and commitment for the cause for which it has

¶289

¶290

been established.

¶291

(vii) He submits that the STF has been constituted in furtherance of Notification envisaging constitution of specialized investigating team in respect of terrorist cases and also organized crimes. The investigation in question entrusted to STF is in respect of organized crime.

¶292

(viii) As any other investigating team, STF has power to summon anyone in connection with the investigation. In the present case, the investigation team has taken all measures as are necessary to unravel the crime, but, keeping in mind the magnitude of the crime, the investigation is somewhat complex. The officials of STF are fully capable of dealing with such complex cases, including when the leads of offence transcend beyond the State boundaries.

¶293

(ix) As regards the criticism of non-inclusion of any technical person in the investigation team, it was submitted that the STF had taken assistance of experts and technical persons while taking care that the confidentiality of the contents, for which enquiry has been made, was not shared with anyone. He submitted that even that criticism now stands redressed on account of inclusion of officials who are computer experts and were earlier associated with Cyber Crime Cell. The STF, having taken technical assistance of Cyber Crime Cell in the past, does not in any way belittle their capabilities or for that matter credibility to investigate the offence in question.

¶294

¶295

(x) Relying on the past service record of the officials who are members of the STF, he submits that the argument of their competency, profile, bias, and credibility cannot be taken forward. Their service record has been unblemished in the past.

¶296

(xi) He submitted that although, initially, STF took over the investigation of FIR registered on 7^th July, 2013, however, subsequently, it has taken over investigation of nine other cases pertaining to VYAPAM examinations. He assured the Court that even the remaining cases which have been registered and pertaining to previous years, on the basis of report of the Dean or Invigilator, as the case may be, investigation of those cases will also be taken over by STF. He pointed out that out of those cases, in one case charge sheet has already been filed. As regards that case also, the STF is willing to take over further investigation, if the Court so directs. In other words, any criminal case pertaining to examination conducted by VYAPAM will be investigated by STF.

¶297

(xii) He submitted that the investigation of all cases by STF will ensure that the investigation thereof is under one roof and by a dedicated force. If need be, STF will submit proposal to State Government for providing additional work force. However, at present, the work force available with the STF is adequate and is performing its duties to the best of their abilities; and since they are not concerned with any other police work or investigation of any other crime, they are fully focused on investigation of offences

¶298

¶299

pertaining to VYAPAM examinations. Further, it may not be advisable to increase the number of work force beyond what is necessary for administrative reasons and to maintain complete confidentiality during investigation. Inasmuch as, because of the sensitivity and magnitude of the crime, sharing of information ought to be between few individuals. In other words, confidentiality cannot be secured with unwieldy work force. For, there is possibility of leakage of information about the line of investigation. Even these aspects have been duly considered.

¶300

(xiii) He then relied on the recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of Muzaffarnagar episode to contend that apprehensions expressed by the petitioners by itself cannot be the basis to transfer the investigation to CBI; and to instil confidence in public the Court may consider of monitoring the investigation done by STF.

¶301

(xiv) He submitted that in the Gujarat case, decided by the Apex Court, facts were glaring. It transpired that the State machinery was used by the officials to put up dummy accused on trial, who in turn, were acquitted. The Supreme Court, therefore, had to intervene and direct investigation by CBI. In the present case, however, nobody has even remotely suggested that the accused named in the FIR or challan filed by the police in the respective cases, are dummy accused. On the contrary, high officials, including from Police Department, have been named in the FIR and are being

¶302

¶303

proceeded with. He, therefore, submits that the principle underlying the decision in Muzaffarnagar case be applied to the present case.

¶304

(xv) He countered the argument of the petitioners that STF had intentionally not applied the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, by pointing out that the rigours predicated by that Act qua the accused would come into play only after the Court takes cognizance of that offence. In the present case, investigation is still going on. On conclusion of investigation, all offences, as may be applicable to that case, will be applied, including of Prevention of Corruption Act and the procedure prescribed under that Act will be followed. He submitted that in Samvida Shala examination conducted by VYAPAM, the allegation is not of swapping or bracketing of roll numbers but of copying.

¶305

(xvi) He also countered the argument of the petitioners that high officials and political leaders are being treated with kid gloves. He pointed out that all the accused against whom corroborative material has become available, have been arrested. The remaining accused will be arrested in due course after such material is collected during the investigation, keeping in mind the principle expounded by the Apex Court in D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal¹⁷ .

¶306

(xvii) He relied on the decision in the case of M.C.

¶307

17 (1997) 1 SCC 416

¶308

¶309

Abraham and another Vs State of Maharashtra and others¹⁸ (paragraphs 2, 6, 10, 13 and 14) to contend that it is not as if it is imperative to arrest the accused immediately after registration of FIR in connection with cognizable offence. That discretion is of the investigating officer and he may proceed to arrest as soon as there is legal ground available to justify the arrest.

¶310

(xviii) He submits that it is not unknown that even in cases investigated by CBI, charge sheets were filed against accused without arrest. It is only after the Court order consequent to filing of charge sheet, arrest was effected. In other words, arrest is not a mechanical matter, but discretion of the investigating officer depending on well established legal principles.

¶311

(xix) He then relied on the decision in the case of Prakash Singh & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.¹⁹ (paragraphs 12 to 22) to contend that the State has ensured that a special dedicated task force is established for investigating the offences concerning VYAPAM examination keeping in mind the sensitivity of the case. He submits that the Head of the STF team is a senior IPS officer holding the rank of A.D.G..P. Even other 07 officers are experienced persons in investigation of such complex cases. They are assisted by 15 other supporting staff. He submitted that the fact that DGP is Head of the Police Department, does not mean that he can influence the investigating team. The ADGP is selected on the basis of

¶312

18 (2003) 2 SCC 649 19 (2006) 8 SCC 1

¶313

¶314

recommendation made by UPSC.

¶315

(xx) He also explained the circumstances in which successive FIRs have been registered by STF consequent to unravelling of the new information during investigation of the first FIR dated 7^th July, 2013. He contended that registration of such successive FIRs is permissible in law. He has placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of State represented by Police, Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, Tiruchirapalli, T.N. vs V. Jayapaul²⁰ and T.T. Antony vs State Of Kerala & Others²¹ .

¶316

(xxi) He also relied on the decision of the Apex Court in

¶317

the case of Lalita Kumari vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others²² to contend that FIR can be registered at the instance of the police officer who can be an informant as well.

¶318

(xxii) He further submitted that no advantage is passed on to any accused by not applying the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act at the time of registration of FIR. On the contrary, because of not invoking those provisions, the STF was able to proceed with the investigation much faster by applying the ordinary offence under IPC. Further, the IPC offences applied are punishable with life imprisonment. There is no special provision regarding grant of bail in respect of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, unlike in the case of TADA/POTA. Moreover, the stringent

¶319

20 (2004) 5 SCC 223

¶320

(2001) 6 SCC 181

¶321

22 (2014) 2 SCC 1

¶322

¶323

provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act would come into play only after Court takes cognizance of the offence. It necessarily follows that no advantage was passed on to the accused at precognizance stage. For all these reasons, he submits that the grievance of the petitioner that the STF intentionally did not apply provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act was ill-advised.

¶324

(xxiii) He submits that although it is enough for the petitioners to point out that the apprehension entertained by them is reasonable apprehension, in the fact situation of the present case, no interference is warranted much less to transfer the investigation to another agency such as CBI.

¶325

(xxiv) He submitted that at best the Court may consider of monitoring the investigation done by STF, which will instil confidence in public.

¶326

(xxv) He submitted that no one has even remotely suggested that any political leader has attempted to influence the officials of STF. He concluded by saying that neither the constitution of STF can be questioned nor its credibility and, more particularly, its approach in the investigation of all the offences. For, the STF has thus far made sincere efforts and has investigated all angles which have come to its notice during the investigation. It will continue to do so and the petitioners or any other person having substantive information are free to assist the investigating agency by providing that information, on the basis of which it can proceed further.

¶327

¶328

14. As regards, the allegation regarding intentional nonarrest of high officials and high profile/important persons, a compilation in sealed cover was furnished for the perusal of the Court to explain the circumstances. That compilation contains all the relevant information about high profile/important persons who have already been arrested; about those who could not be arrested as they are absconding; and why STF has not arrested some of the high profile/important persons so far. The contents of that compilation were read out to us during the arguments without mentioning the names of the persons. That compilation has been directed to be kept in sealed cover.

¶329

15. Counsel appearing for the CBI submitted that the offence in question is neither an interstate dispute nor having any international ramification. Therefore, the CBI on its own may not take initiative to investigate the said crime unless the State Government accords consent therefor. However, as of now the State Government has not decided to give such consent.

¶330

16. After having considered the rival submissions the fundamental question as to when the High Court ought to exercise its jurisdiction to transfer the investigation of the case from the local police to an independent Agency such as CBI need not detain us. For, it is well established position that the Court must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of its Constitutional powers. The Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in a recent decision in the

¶331

¶332

case of The Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (supra) observed thus:

¶333

“70. Before parting with the case, we deem it necessary to emphasize that despite wide powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these Constitutional powers. The very plenitude of the power under the said Articles requires great caution in its exercise. In so far as the question of issuing a direction to the CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extra-ordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise the CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations.

¶334

In Minor Irrigation & Rural Engineering Services, U.P. Vs. Sahngoo Ram Arya this Court had said that an order directing an enquiry by the CBI should be passed only when the High Court, after considering the material on record, comes to a conclusion that such material does disclose a prima facie case calling for an investigation by the CBI or any

¶335

¶336

other similar agency. We respectfully concur with these observations.”

¶337

(emphasis supplied)

¶338

17. As multiple decisions have been cited across the Bar to buttress the same issue, we may remind ourselves of the exposition of the Apex Court in the case of Rashmi Metaliks Limited and

¶339

another Vs. Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority and others²³ (paras 7, 10.5) that if innumerable decisions on a particular point of law are cited during the arguments the correct approach for the Court is to predicate arguments on the decision which holds the field. Further, there is little or no advantage to be gained from the manner in which the Court may respond to the factual matrix as other courts may legitimately place emphasis on seemingly similar facts to arrive at a different conclusion. It held that the manner in which a Bench appreciates the factual matrix before it can obviously be of value only if a subsequent case presents identical facts, which remains a rarity. The Court then went on to observe that the ratio decidendi of the case has to be followed and for which the Court also noted that the counsel must, therefore, exhibit circumspection in the number of cases they cite. The sheer plethora of precedents makes it essential that the Court should abjure from discussing each and every decision which has dealt with a similar question of law. Else, it leads to prolixity in judgments which invariably is a consequence of

23 (2013) 10 SCC 95

lengthy arguments.

18. Nevertheless, we will advert to the dictum of the Apex

¶344

Court in some of the decisions which may be relevant to answer the controversy in issue. In the case of State of Maharashtra and others vs. Sheela Ramesh Kini and others²⁴ , the Apex Court disapproved the reason weighed with the High Court for transferring the investigation to CBI, namely, because of immense amount of public interest, public outcry and public demand in that behalf. In paragraph 4 of the said decision, the Court observed thus:

¶345

“4. Insofar as the view of the High Court that the crime has generated immense amount of public interest or, in other words, a public outcry and that in a manner a public demand has been made towards transference of the investigation to the CBI, with respect, we do not agree with the High Court. Decisions cannot be made on the verdict of the numbers. A situation of the kind can develop many a time, but courts have to maintain their cool and watch the events with a fair amount of objectivity. And it is not difficult for interested parties sometimes to manipulate mass outcry; highly litigious as our country has emerged to be…..”

¶346

(emphasis supplied)

¶347

In the fact situation of that case, the Apex Court having agreed with

¶348

the other findings recorded by the High Court was pleased to reject

¶349

the appeal filed by the State. To put it differently, we may have to record a clear finding that it has become necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in the investigation assigned to STF or that the transfer of investigation to some other agency is essential

¶350

24 (1998) 9 SCC 346

¶351

¶352

to do complete justice in enforcing the fundamental rights.

¶353

19. Keeping in mind the principles expounded by the Apex Court we may first examine the background in which the STF has been constituted. Indisputably, it has been constituted on 26^th August, 2013 in connection with FIR (registered on 7^th July, 2013) concerning the mass scale irregularities and unfair means resorted to during the examinations held by VYAPAM on 7^th July, 2013. Soon after the constitution, the STF swung into action and continued with the investigation of that case. The State Government, looking to the gravity of the matter and realizing that the incident was not an isolated incident but offence committed by organized crime syndicate, on its own, in less than seven weeks from registration of FIR on 7^th July, 2013, had constituted the Special Task Force, vide order dated 26^th August, 2013. The constitution of the STF was to set up a police station by the name of Special Task Force having territorial jurisdiction over whole of the State of Madhya Pradesh for the purposes of investigation in the offence relating to examinations conducted by the VYAPAM. The STF is a separate unit headed by the ADGP. It consists of eight experienced and independent IPS officers, under whose supervision the investigation of the assigned cases is being done. The details of the said officers are as under:

¶354

¶355

SUPERVISION/ INVESTIGATION OF VYAPAM CASES IS DONE BY FOLLOWING OFFICERS.

¶356

S.No. 1.	DESIGNATION ADGP	NAME OF OFFICER Shri Sudhir Kumar Sahi, IPS 1998 Batch. Has experience of working in Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) of Govt. Of India as Director.
2.	AIG	Shri Ashish Khare, SPS (2001 Batch) Has done BSc and MSc in Criminology and Forensic Science. He is a Senior Police Officer.
3.	DSP	Shri Dilraj Singh Baghel. He is Senior Police Officer, of 33 years of service and having experience of various types of investigations like fake mark-sheet cases by an organised syndicate/ Bhopal Gas Tragedy fake Compensation cases/ Liquor permit conspiracy cases/ issue of fake RTO License by organised syndicate cases.
4.	DSP	Shri Gulab Singh Rajput, He is having more 32 years experience of investigation of various types of Crimes.
5.	DSP	Shri D.K. Tiwari He is also having more than 32 years experience of investigation of various types of Crimes.
6.	Inspector	Shri K.S. Randhawa, He is an experience officer of 15 years of service. He is also having more than 14 years experience of investigation of various types of Crimes.
7.	Inspector	Shri Indresh Tripathi. He is an experience officer of 15 years of service. He is also having more than 14 years experience of investigation of various types of Crimes.
8.	Inspector	Shri Harish Dubey. He belongs to 2004 batch and is having 8 years of investigation into thevarious kinds of crimes.

¶357

It is noticed that this Investigating Team can take assistance of other

¶358

police branches including from Cyber Crime Cell and CID as and when required.

¶359

20. By the time the petitions were taken up for hearing, 10 cases were already assigned to STF for investigation or have been investigated by it. The chart indicating the details of said cases and the status of investigation has been placed on record, which reads thus:

¶360

S.No. P.S./ Cr. No./ Offence Section/ Name of Exam Complainant/Source of Registration	Date of Regis.	No. of Accused According to FIR	Registering Officer	IO.	Increased Accused during Investigation	Number of arrested accused	Number of accused against whom Charge sheet has been filed	Date of Filing Charge Sheet	Supervising Authority	Remark
1 Rajendra Nagar Indore/539/13, 419, 420, 467, 471, 120-B, 201 IPC 65 IT Act. 25, 27 A. Act 34 Ex. Act, MP Ex. R. Act 1937, Sec. 3 (D-1, 2)/4 [PMT-2013] K.C. Patidar S.I. Crime Branch Indore By Information of Informer	07.07.2013	2	M.D. Mishra S.I. P.S. Rajendra Nagar	D.S. Baghel DSP, STF	List Received from Vyapam 876 Suspected Candidate & Others	70	64	511/13 04.10.13 511-A 26.12.13	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare AIG MP STF	173(8) CrPC recently Arrested 6 Accused
2 M.P. Nagar Bhopal/720/13, 409, 420, 120-B, IPC 65, 66 IT Act. Data Manupulation Breach of Trust Pramod Sharma Asstt. Controller VYAPAM	11.10.2013	4	O.P. Meena S.I. P.S. MP Nagar	D.S. Baghel DSP	List Received from Vyapam 876 Suspected Candidate & Others	4	All Accused	26/14 20.01.2014	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare AIG MP STF
3 STF M.P. Bhopal/12/13 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, IPC 65, 66 IT Act, MP Ex. R. Act 1937, Sec 3 D(1- 1,2)/4 [PMT-2012] D.S. Baghel D.S.P. STF Investigation Cr. No.539/13, Excel Sheet recovered from Nitin Mohindra Computer	30.10.2013	11	D.S. Baghel DSP, STF	D.S. Baghel DSP	List Received from Vyapam 701Suspected Candidate & Others	26	13	03/14 28.01.14	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare AIG MP STF	173(8) CrPC Investigation Continue
4 STF M.P. Bhopal/14/13, 409, 420, 120-B, IPC, MP Ex. R. Act 1937, D.S. Baghel D.S.P. STF Investigation Cr. No.539/13,Excel Sheet	20.11.2013	17	D.S. Baghel DSP	D.S. Baghel DSP		17	17	05/14 20.02.14	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare	173(8) CrPC Investigation Continue

¶361

¶362

Sec 3 D(1-1,2)/4 [Pre PG-2012] recovered from Nitin Mohindra Computer					AIG MP STF
5 STF M.P. Bhopal/15/13, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, IPC 65, 66 IT Act, MP Ex. R. Act 1937, Sec 3 D(1- 1,2)/4 [Ins. Measurement & Food Inspector - 2012] D.S. Baghel D.S.P. STF Investigation Cr. No.539/13, Excel Sheet recovered from Nitin Mohindra Computer	22.11.2013	29 D.S. Baghel DSP	G.S. Rajput, DSP, STF	23 8 07/14 20.03.14	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare AIG MP STF	173(8) CrPC recently Arrested 15 Accused
6 STF M.P. Bhopal/16/13, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, IPC 65, 66 IT Act, MP Ex. R. Act 1937, Sec 3 D(1- 1,2)/4 [Dairy Joint Exam- 2012] D.S. Baghel D.S.P. STF Investigation Cr. No.539/13, Excel Sheet recovered from Nitin Mohindra Computer	22.11.2013	19 D.S. Baghel DSP	D.K. Tiwari, DSP, STF	14 14 06/14 05.03.14	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare AIG MP STF	173(8) CrPC Investigation Continue
7 STF M.P. Bhopal/17/13, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, IPC 65, 66 IT Act, MP Ex. R. Act 1937, Sec 3 D(1- 1,2)/4 [Police Sub Ins. Exam-2012] D.S. Baghel D.S.P. STF Investigation Cr. No.539/13, Excel Sheet recovered from Nitin Mohindra Computer	23.11.2013	25 D.S. Baghel DSP	D.S. Baghel DSP, STF	1 1 Charge Sheet not put up	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare AIG MP STF	Investigation Continue

¶363

¶364

8 STF M.P. Bhopal/18/13, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, IPC 65, 66 IT Act, MP Ex. R. Act 1937, Sec 3 D(1- 1,2)/4 [Police const.. Exam- 2012]	D.S. Baghel D.S.P. STF Investigation Cr. No.539/13, Excel Sheet recovered from Nitin Mohindra Computer	23.11.2013	53 D.S. Baghel DSP	D.K. Tiwari DSP, STF	7 Charge Sheet not put up	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare AIG MP STF	Investigation Continue
8 STF M.P. Bhopal/19/13, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, IPC 65, 66 IT Act, MP Ex. R. Act 1937, Sec 3 D(1-1,2/ 4 [Samvida Teacher Grade-3 Exam-2011]	D.S. Baghel D.S.P. STF Investigation Cr. No.539/13, Excel Sheet recovered from Nitin Mohindra Computer	07.12.2013	77 D.S. Baghel DSP	D.S. Baghel, DSP STF	Nil Charge Sheet not put up	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare AIG MP STF	Investigation Continue
10 STF M.P. Bhopal/20/13, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, IPC 65, 66 IT Act, MP Ex. R. Act 1937, Sec 3 D(1-1,2/ 4 [Samvida Teacher Grade-2 Exam-2011]	D.S. Baghel D.S.P. STF Investigation Cr. No.539/13, Excel Sheet recovered from Nitin Mohindra Computer	09.12.2013	36 D.S. Baghel DSP	D.S. Baghel DSP, STF	1 Charge Sheet not put up	Shri S.K. Sahi ADGP MP STF & Shri Ashish Khare AIG MP STF	Investigation Continue

¶365

The FIRs registered after constitution of STF, were at the instance of STF on the basis of the information that became available during the investigation of the FIR No.539/2013.

¶366

21. During the hearing it was pointed out to us that in the course of investigation on the basis of material gathered by the Investigating Team, 84 students, 15 racketeers, 4 VYAPAM officials and 26 parents, aggregating to 129 persons have been arrested. Amongst the high profile/important persons arrested by STF are as follows:

¶367

Sr.No.	List of High Profile/Important Persons who have been arrested
1.	Dr.PankajTrivedi, Controller/DirectorofVYAPAM
2.	Nitin Mohindra,PrincipalSystem Analyst ofVYAPAM
3.	AjayKumar Sen,Senior System Analyst
4.	ChandrakantMishra,AssistantProgrammerofVYAPAM
5.	Tarang Sharma,Racketeer
6.	O.P. Shukla,OSD of Ex-Minister Laxmikant Sharma
7.	Dr. VinodBhandari,Racketeer(Chairman,AurobindoHospital)
8.	Dr. JagdishSagar,Main Racketeer
9.	Dr. Sanjeev Shilpkar,Racketeer
10.	Sudhir Rai,Racketeer
11.	SantoshGupta,Racketeer

¶368

22. It has also come on record that three persons against whom STF has evidence are absconding and efforts are being made to secure their presence, amongst others, R.K. Shivhare, Deputy Inspector General of Police (under suspension), Bharat Mishra (brother of Inspector General of Police, Sonali Sharma) and Sanjeev Saxena (political leader from opposition party). Information was divulged to the Court that six other persons, who have been named as accused, have not been arrested as more evidence establishing their

¶369

¶370

involvement in the commission of crime was being collected; they are:

¶371

Laxmikant Sharma, Ex-Cabinet Minister

¶372

Sudheer Sharma, Businessman

¶373

Amit Pandey (husband of IAS Officer Smt. Ajita Bajpai Pandey)

¶374

Premchand Prasad, Ex-P.A. to Chief Minister.

¶375

Dr. Ajay Mehta, Ex-Vice President of Jan Abhiyan Parishad

¶376

Dhanraj Singh Yadav, Ex-OSD of Hon’ble Governor

¶377

Out of these six persons, Dhanraj Singh Yadav, Ex-OSD of Hon’ble

¶378

Governor has been granted anticipatory bail by the Court.

¶379

23. A chart containing the information, justifying the arrest of the concerned accused, was also placed before us in a sealed cover. Similarly, the reasons for non-arrest of six high profile/ important persons were also brought to our notice, which was produced in sealed cover for the perusal of the Court. As the investigation is already in progress, we would not comment upon those aspects as it may affect the investigation or prejudice the concerned accused.

¶380

24. Our attention was also invited to the statements of Dr. Pankaj Trivedi, Director/Controller, Nitin Mohindra, Principal System Analyst, O.P. Shukla, OSD of Minister, Laxmikant Sharma, Ex-Cabinet Minister, Sudheer Sharma, Businessman and Gyanendra Mishra, which are part of the compilation produced in sealed cover for our perusal.

¶381

¶382

25. Our attention was also invited to order of reward announced qua absconding accused by the STF for securing their arrest. Further, assurance was given that follow up action to secure arrest of absconding accused will be taken with utmost dispatch in due course.

¶383

26. After perusal of the information given by the STF we are of the opinion that it is not a case of deliberate non-arrest of high profile/important persons. Beyond this, we need not say anything more for the time being, as assurance has been given that follow up action is being taken by the Investigating Team and depending on the availability of further material indicating their complicity, the Investigating Officer would take steps to arrest even those persons. Assurance is also given that steps are being taken to secure arrest of absconding persons, who have been named as accused and/or are wanted in connection with the pending investigation and that process will be expedited.

¶384

27. After having analysed the material made available to us, we may conclude that there is no substance in the grievance of the petitioners that the STF is incapable of handling the investigation of the offences in question or have shown laxity in the investigation in any manner. Further, the STF Officials In-charge of the investigation are able, independent, impartial and experienced police officers; coupled with the fact that there is no material to suggest that any influence has been brought on them from any quarter or that their

¶385

¶386

approach is biased. As a result, the question of considering the relief of transferring the investigation to any other independent agency, at this stage, is ruled out.

¶387

28. We are consciously not elaborating on each of the points, raised by the petitioners as any detail discussion in that behalf may either affect the pending investigation or prejudice the accused and is avoidable.

¶388

29. We may place on record that before constitution of the STF, 16 cases of impersonation during the examination have been filed since year 2000 on the basis of the report given by the Dean of the Medical College. Out of that only in one case, the local police has filed challan/police report. The chart of those FIRs and status of investigation has also been produced before us, which reads thus:

¶389

“ ��

¶390

� �� !��"! � ��

¶391

�� 4�� ,�� ��7�� '��0� �:� =�F�� <(�� : ��+��G��?4��
��/�� E�/�� 60� �� 5��( ��
�� 5��( <�� 5��(
� � <�� <��
��5��( �� 3��
<�� 3�� 3��
��
��3��
A� H� I� J� �� K� L� M� N�
A� O� � �� P�� AIMDAI� �� A�� HA� IK� AA� A��1�� /?��,��#��!�
JAN2�JH�2�JKM2�JLA2� ,��
AH��-��5��/��2�IDJ� � � ��Q��,� H��/��HL��J�AI�� AN��I�AJ��
�� P�� (�E�M�� /?��;��=��
19-04-2013 � � (�1�� ,�� !��
I��:��:��<�8� ��
� � �5��IK�� - � ��
��/�� /?��,� � �� +��
��'� � ��!�
J��H�� '� � �� !��
��+�� ,�� !
H� O� � �� P�� JJNDAI� �� MA� AN� A�� AL� A��1�� 0�H��K��4��H��L��
JAN2�JH�2�JKM2�JLA2� ,�� - � ��/?��,��1��.��
AH��-��5��/��2�IDJ� � � ��Q��,� ��/� � ,�� #��0�H��M�
�� P�� @�4��H�A�� /?��,��*�#��!��
20-10-2013
H��MI�� H��K�� HN�
�4��H��L�� AL��/ � �� 0�
��5��!��
I��0��H��M�� HL��/ � ��4��0��
H�A�� HJ��/ � �� - � ��

¶392

¶393

I� P��,��	IN�DAA� JAN2�JH�2�JKM2�JLA2� JLJ�5��/��2�� 11-11-2011	�� -()/�3�� ��Q��,� ��	�I�	��	�I�	�A�	�:��4��<�8 ��+�� ,��!�� J��/�� ��+��'��!� ��+��,��! A��$%�ALIEM� ,��:�� ��9�� AJHDAI��/��AN��AI�� ��!�� H��)��+��EAMNIDAI��/�� HA��AI��,��:��!�� I��:��@�4��:�� ���0���#��+��,��!�� �����**�
J� P��,��	HKKDAH� JAN2�JH�2�JKM2�JLA2� JLJ�5��/��2�� 08-07-2012	�� -()/�3�� ��Q��,� ��	HA�	��	HA�	��	J��/��'��! A��:��0��*�#��!�� H��(��9)��+��(� �:��/�� HL��I�H�AJ��(��9)�� ��5��,��!�� I��5��'��!�
�� �F��,-��(��	�AJDAA� �� JH�2�JKL2�JKM2�JLA2� AH��-��5��/��2�� 15-07-2011	��,�� �(5��9)/*�-�� ��Q��,� ,-��(��	A��	��	A��	A��	J��+��,��! ��9��8+�0�!��+��)�� ,��:��,-��(�� �?�(��!� 9��JLMDAI�!����+��� AJAAADAI��/��HA��N�AI�!�)�� 6��+��9��+��,��/�� ��5��(��!�� ��!��*��+�� )��4��-��!��
K� �F��,-��(��	MNMDAI� JAN2�JH�2�5��/��2�IDJ� �� 16-11-2013	��,�� �(5��9)/*�-�� ��Q��,� ,-��(��	HK�	�I�	HN�	��	�� A��/��/?��,��,��9��(� �� �:�� �:�� ��:��4��<�8 ��5��,��,�� '��!�� �H��5��HN�� ��'��!�� I��*��+��(��!��
L� ��6��	HKKDAI�� JAN2�JH�2�JKK2�JKL2� JKM2�JLA2�A�N2�AH��-�� 5��/��2�IDJ�� �� 28-04-2013	�� �� ��Q��,� ��	AM�	��	AM�	AK�	A��/��/?��,��:��4�� <�8 ��,��9��(�5��,��,��'��!�� H��H��'��!�� I��*��+��(��,��!��
M� ��6��	HKLDAI�� JAN2�JH�2�JKK2�JKL2� JKM2�JLA2�A�N2�AH��-�� 5��/��2�IDJ�� �� 29-04-2013	�� �� ��Q��,� ��	��	��	��	�J�	A��60��/R��,�� ��#��!�� �H��:��<��8+�0�� ��(�1��/?��,��#�� '��!�� I��/��/?��,��+��(� �:��<�8 ��5��,��,��'��!�� J��'��!�� ��*��+��(��,��!��
N� ��6��	LILDAI�� JAN2�JH�2�JKK2�JKL2� JKM2�JLA2�A�N2�AH��-�� 5��/��2�IDJ�� �� 13-11-2013	�� �� ��Q��,� ��	A��	��	A��	�A�	A��N��'��!�� H��J�� �� ��-�� �:��0���#��!�� I��K��-��/�� /?��,��:��5��,��,��'��!� J��5��-��/�� /?��,�,��9��(��<�8 ��5��,��,�� '��!�� ����+��(��,��!��
A�� ��:,��5��	IK�DAH�� JH�2�JKL2�JKM2�JLA2� AH��-��5��/��2�� 04-07-2012	�� ��Q��,� 5��	HM�	�L�	I��	HK�	A��$%�ALISMT� /��9��)��'�� !�� H��9��*��INND�AH��/��HK�AAU H�AH� I����+����K�DAI�!�� J��)��'��5�� ������*(��/��A��J� H�AJ��!��

¶394

¶395

								K��:��0���#��!�� L��<�8� ��0���#��!� �:�� �/��HM��I�H�AJ��5��,���!�� M��'��IJ��5��(<��$.�� ,��
AA�	?��,�6�/��	AH�ID�N�� JH�2�JKM2�JLA2�5��/��2�� 05-11-2009	�� ��@�� ?�V��9��@�� ��G�� 6)/��	�H�	��	�H�	��	A��/��/?��,��+��(� �:��4�� :��<�8 ��5��,�� ,��'��!�� H��4��6��,-��(�� ��-��/?��,��#��'��!� I��'��!� J��+��,��!��
AH�	?��,�6�/��	AAILDAA�� JH�2�JKL2�JKM2�JLA2� 5��/��2�� 10-11-2011	�� ��@�� ?�V��9��@�� ��G�� 6)/��	�M�	��	�M�	��	:��-��:��0� �*�#��:��<��,�� ��/?��,��+��(�<�8� �� 5��,��!��
AI�	?��,�6�/��	AHAMDAH�� JH�2�JAL2�5��/��2�� 04-10-2012	�� ��@�� ?�V��9��@�� ��G�� 6)/��	�A�	��	�A�	��	A��:��0���#��!�� H��/��/?��<�8 ��5��,��'�� !�� I����+��9��,��!��
AJ�	?��,�6�/��	A�A�DAH�� JH�2�JAN2�JKL2�JKM2� JLA2�5��/��2�� 28-12-2012	#�9��0� /��9��@�� ��G�� 6)/�*�	�A�	��	�A�	�A�	A��/��HJ��A�H�AJ�� ��/�� /?��,��+��(�<�(� �� 5�� :��5��,��!��*�0� ���#��!�� H��?�8��8+�0C��9��8+�0�!�� I��9��'�*��!�
A��	?��,�6�/��	AIJKDAI�� JH�2�JKL2�JKM2�JLA2� 5��/��2�� 21-12-2013	�� ��@�� ?�V��9��@�� ��G�� 6)/��	�I�	��	�I�	�I�	A��1��/?��,��#��'�� !� H��/?��,��#��(��/��HL� �J�H�AI��HH��A�H�AJ��(��K� ?��+��5��,��!�� I� ��/��/?��,��9� ��(�� �:��4��<�8 ��5��,�,��'�� !�� I��*��+��(��,��!��
AK� ��"�	?��,�6�/�� �E�	IMDAJ�� JH�22�JKM2�JLA2�AH��-�� H�A�5��/��2�� 15-01-2014	�� ��@�� ?�V��9��@�� ��G�� 6)/��	�H� HHN�	�� ��	�H� HMN�	�A� NK�	A�1��,��/?��,�,=�� '��!� H� ��/��/?��,��+��(�� <�8 ��@�4��:��5��,��'��!� I��'��!� J��*��+��,��!��

¶396

Another chart indicating the status of 16 criminal cases registered since 2000, which was furnished by the respondents for our information reads thus:

¶397

��#��$%� & � � � �'� � �� ()��

¶398

��* � %�%�+��,��-��-.�.�!.�� /��0��1�2*�

¶399

�*	4��,��	�� ��/��*�	�/��0�� ��4��1��	>��*�� ��/��	)�� ��2���+���� ��/��	)�� ��	��9��+��/�� ��	)�� ��(�� �4��	�G��?4��
1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
A	��3�+ ��3�+ ��	��*�IJHD�J� �� JH�2JAN2JKL2JKM2AH�� -��5��/�� �/��AH��K�H��J�	�� ��9�)/� �� �� 3�+ ��	�KND�K� �L�AA��K	LKK�D�K��/�� A��AA��K��,� ��3�+ ��	HA��A�AJ	A��AJ	��	P��*��5��'��
H	��3�+ ��3�+ ��	��*�IJID�J� �� JH�2JAN2JKM2AH��-�� 5��/�� �/��AH��K�H��J�	�� ��9�)/� �� �� 3�+ ��	�� K�LD�� H��AH��	HIKAD��/�� HM�AH��,� ��3�+ ��	AI�AH�AI	AK��J�AJ	��	P��*��5��'��
I	��3�+ ��3�+ ��	��*�IJJD�J� �� JH�2JAN2JKL2JKM2AH�� -��5��/�� �/��AH��K�H��J	�� ��9�)/� �� �� 3�+ ��	K�MD�� H��AH��	HIKID��/�� HM�AH��,� ��3�+ ��	��H�AJ�	�K��M�AJ	��	P��*��5��'��
J	��3�+ ��3�+ ��	��*�IJ�D�J� �� JH�2JAN2JKL2JKM2AH�� -��5��/��	-�� ��+��*��/� �� #��	K�ND��H��AH��	HIK�D��/�� HM�AH��,� ��3�+ ��	AH�AH�AI�	HI��L�AJ	��	P��*��5��'��

¶400

¶401

	�/��AH��K�H��J�	��<��3�+ ��
� ��7�� 3�+ ��	��*�HJID�J� �� JAN2JH�2JKK2JKM2AH�� -��5��/��/�� AA��K��J�	W�� �'�� #�� ��<��3�+ ��	K�JDIA�AH��	IN�D�K��/�� H��A��K��,� ��3�+ ��	E	HH��J�AJ	��	P��*��5��'��
K ��7�� 3�+ ��	��*�HJJD�J� �� JAN2JH�2JKK2JKM2AH�� -��5��/��/�� AA��K�H��J�	W�� �'�� #�� ��<��3�+ ��	JKLD�M��N��	AJLMD��/�� ��,��3�+ ��	H��AH�AI	AH��AJ	��	P��*��5��'��
L ��7�� 3�+ ��	��*�HJ�D�J� �� JAN2JH�2JKK2JKM2AH�� -��5��/��/�� AA��K�H��J�	W�� �'�� #�� ��<��3�+ ��	JKMD�M��N��	AJLND��/�� �M��N��,� ��3�+ ��	AH�AH�AI	HH��L�AJ	��	P��*��5��'��
M ��(��	��*� AALDH�� JAN2��IDJ� ��6,�:�� ��JKL2JKM2AH�� -��	��9�� �*�� ��(��	>��*� I�NDH�� �/��AM�AH� H��	#��'��9�� AHHKDH�� ���EAMHADAA� ��,��(��	A��H�AJ	�H��J�AJ	��	P��*��5��'��

¶402

¶403

N	��60��(��	��*�AHND�K� ��JAN2JH�2�� IDJ�� ��	W��-�� �<��*�9��0� ?�8��H� ��(��	>��HN�D�K� AA�AH��K	#��'��9�� HKJND�K��,� ��(��	AN��H�AJ	AK��J�AJ	��	P��*��5��'��
A�	��60��(��	��*�AI�D�K� ��JAN2JH�2�� IDJ�� ��	W��,��60� �*��,�� ��,��(�	>��*� HMLD�K�AA�AH��K�	��X��9�� HKD�K��,�� ��(��	HL��I�AJ	E	)��	P��*��5��'��
AA	��60��(��	��*�AIAD�K� ��AJAN2JH�2�� IDJ�� ��	W��-�� �<��*�9��0� ?�8��H� ��(��	9��	#��'��9�� LHAD�M��,� ��(��	HK��I�AJ	E	��	P��*��5��'��
AH	��5��	LHMD�N�� JAN2JH�2�5��/�� �/��N�AA��N�	��)/*�� 5��	>��*� INMDA��HN�A��A��	AHHLNDA�� �/��AN�AA� H�AA��(3�� )�� /+ ��2� 5��	E	E	��	P��*��5��'��
AI	��5��	K�NDA�� JAN2JH�2�5��/��	�(3��-�D��'�� -(/�3�+ � �9��@��	>��*� ��JDAI��/�� �K�AH�AI�	��DAJ��/�� HJ��A�H�AJ��(3�� )��	E	E	��	P��*��5��'��

¶404

¶405

		��2� ��0��		/+ ��2� )��5��
AJ �(��,�6)/��	�HIDAA�� JAN2JH�2JK�2JKL2� 5��/��IDJ� ��ANMH� �/��HJ��L�H�AA	W��,��/��/� ��-��;�� �*9��0�-�� ��G��6)/��	IMADHL��M�H�AA	AK�HHDAA�HL��M� H�AA��,�� ��0��B-��AA� )��6)/�� -�/����+��� LHIDA��0� �B-��JN��9�� �� )��'��6)/�� ��9��+��(� ��-�� E	AK��J�AJ	��	A���9(�� ��!��I��'��
A� ��'��(��5��	��MDAI�� JH�2IJ�5��/��	W��-�-�� ��/�� �$+�� �,��	�HK�DAI��/�� HM�AH�AI	IHHLDAJ��/�� HL��A�H�AJ� ��)�� /+ ��*4�� W�+��5�� A��H�AJ	E	��	P��*��5��'��
AK ��,�)/*��6�/��	JJHD�N�� JAN2JH�2�5��/��I� ��SAT�SHT�DJ�� �� �/��L�H��N	�(3��-��89�� ��2�.��@�� ��W�� ��/��,�� ��Y'��3�� 6)/��	�� >��*�� J�LD�N��/�� �H��N�H��N	���+���� H�HAKDH��N� �/��I��N� H��N�,��:� ��6)/�� E	E	��	P��*��5��'��

¶406

In addition to the abovenoted cases, 5 cases are registered since 2012 on the basis of the report given by persons other than Dean of the

¶407

Medical College. A chart indicating the status of those cases is also furnished, which reads thus:

¶408

��#��$%� & � � � �'� � �� ()��

¶409

��%%�+��0��1��-.�� $��

¶410

�* 4��,��	�� �D�� ��/��*�	�X��0�� ��4��1��	���8���� �� �� ��3��	��9�� ��-FC�� �� �� �� ��3��	�(�� �� �� ��3��	�(�� ��:�� �� �� ��3��	��/�� ,��9�� �?4��	�/?��, ��+�� ��	�� ��G��	�� ,��Q�� �� ��*�	<�� ��9�� ��/�� �� �� .�� 7�� 7�� �� ��Z�� ?��(�� ��[�	�*��+�� �G��?4��	ALI�SMT� ,�:�� �� ��9�� ��+�� �� ��3�� ��	� �� �� �� ��$.� Y'�� ��(�� ��,�� ��	)�� �� ��+�� �� �/��
							�:� �� ��	?�� �:� ��	1�8� ��
A H	I	J	�	K	L	M	N	A�	AA	AI	AK	AL	AM	AN	HA
A ��,� 6�/��	� NAADAH�� JH�25��/�� �/��AA��L� H�AH	�Q��)��(�� ��W�� ��;�*�JL� �'�0��H�H��V�+�� ��0��)��A�D�A� ;'��,�,�� �B��;+ �6)/��	�J	��	�J	�H	5��,�� ��	��	�5��,�� ��	4�� ��)/�(�� 5�� ��� JNJDH�AH� ��5����� A2��(�� ��;:0� ��\��)/� ��H��	�*��+�� 9�� �� �� �:��/�� ��4�� �� �� 7�� 7��	/�� ��'��,��!� ��/�� /?��,��+�� ��(�<�8� ��4�� �:�� 5��,��,��4�� -��,�� �*�#��'�� !�	E	E

¶411

¶412

										��+��(�� �� �� I��;��'�� �� ��'��*��/� W��?��2	��)�� �� ��?4�� 6�� \�� �� �� ��!� ��"��5�� �� ��9�� �� �� �� �� .�� �� �� ��!� �
H ��X��(�� 5��	�A�DAI�� JH�2IJ�5��/�� ��/�� �I��M�H�AI	W�� 5�8��8�0��2��*�� ��-�4�� ��-�O&,�� �,��O&,�� ��+��	�I	��	�I	��	E	E	E	�5�� �� �]��	��	�]�� �� ��'��,��	E E	E
I �� 5��	IM�DAI�� JH�2JKL2IJ� AH��-��5��/�� �/��L��N� H�AI	�Q��0�R��,�� 9)/�� ��9��S��8�� ��)��*/�'�T	�J	�I	�L	�K	E	E	E		��	��9��,��	E E	E
J �-�-��,�	�LNDAI��	�Q�\��3��	�J	�H	�K	�I		5��,��		A�,��8�;:�	:,�0��	��+��*�	�� �I	��,��

¶413

¶414

5��	JH�2JKL2JKM2J LA2AH��-��H�A� 5��/��/�� HN��N�H�AI�	��/��60��;�*� I��#�� �B-��I�:�� �B-��H�A�?��)/� ��0��)��-,�,� ��,��9�� ��(��						�� ���0� ��*�# ��		,��)/*�� ��H�� �(��	�� �� �� ��,�� �� '�� �� �� �� �� ��3�� �� -�-�^��	��:��I� �� ��$.�9�� ��Z�� ��\��'��I� �� ��$.��ALI� SMT��)��0�� �8��9�� ,��!�	�� ��$.� 9��*� KKIDAI� �/��HI� AH�AI�� �� ��	��	5�� �� AALA�DAI� �/��HJ� AH�AI�
� ��X��(�� 5��	��*� �KKDAH�� JH�2J�N2IJ25�� /��HM��N�AI	��/@��0�� ��,8�;��HK� ��,�� ��,�� �+ ��,�� ��,�� �)��*/�'��	�H	��	�H	�A	E	E	&��9� �� Y'��	� � A2�� ��+�	�5�� �� ��9�� ��!�	1. �� �� �� ��:�� ��'�� H��=�8 �� ��,��9� �� '��	�� �� ��$.�� ALIDM�� �� 9�� ANIDAI� �/���*�HH� �J�AI�	�� �A	,� ��:�� 5�� HNH�HDAI� �/��HH� �J�AI

¶415

30. During the hearing we were assured by the counsel for the respondents that all the aforesaid cases will be immediately transferred to STF, who is already entrusted with the investigation of other cases in connection with examinations conducted by VYAPAM, so that holistic view of all the cases can be taken by the said Investigating Team. As regards the case, arising out of FIR No.523/2011 registered at Police Station Tukoganj, Indore, since charge-sheet has already been filed, STF may consider as to whether further investigation will be necessary and it may do so, if the Court directs. We may accede to this request of the respondents and issue directions accordingly.

¶416

31. We were assured during the hearing that if there are any other pending cases in any part of the State of Madhya Pradesh concerning offences relating to examinations conducted by VYAPAM, investigation of all those cases will be entrusted to STF by issuing appropriate orders in that behalf by the concerned Department.

¶417

32. After giving our serious consideration to the material placed on record we find that the constitution of the STF by the State Government was without wasting any time soon after realizing the magnitude and complexity of the crime coupled with the fact that it was a case of offence committed by organized crime syndicate. Further, the composition of Special Task Force is of experienced

¶418

¶419

officials with unblemished record. None of the petitioner has attributed any motive to any particular official(s) of STF. It also appears to us that STF has not wasted any time in investigating the crime or has showed any slackness during the investigation. Nonarrest of some of the accused or persons, who are allegedly involved in the offence, till now, by itself, cannot be the basis to assume that the investigation is not free and fair or is being done under dictation of any political leader. No such material is presently noticed from the record.

¶420

33. Notably, during the investigation of FIR No.539/2013, the commission of similar offences in the past came to light and soon thereafter STF caused to register subsequent FIRs in that regard. The subsequent FIR mentions about the involvement of high officials and political leaders as well. If, STF was acting under dictation, it would certainly have kept that information under cover to protect the high officials and political leaders. The subsequent FIRs referring to the possible involvement of political leaders belonging to the ruling party, in our opinion, lend credence to the impartiality and independence of STF. All this would not have happened if STF was working under pressure or on instructions from higher-ups. Any other view would be demoralizing the officials of STF and questioning their sincerity and integrity in absence of any tangible material in that behalf which we must eschew.

¶421

¶422

34. Reverting to the apprehension of the petitioners of not invoking offences ascribable to the Prevention of Corruption Act with an ulterior purpose to favour the accused, we find force in the argument of the respondents that it would make no difference. Firstly because, the investigation is still on going. In most of the cases challan/charge-sheet is yet to be filed; and when the challan/chargesheet will be filed, depending on the material collected during investigation, even offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act can be invoked by the Investigating Officer. Further, the offences already mentioned in the registered FIRs are punishable with life imprisonment. Hence, no advantage has been passed on to the named accused. Only if the trial were to proceed on the basis of purely Indian Penal Code offences, it would be possible to say that noninclusion of Prevention of Corruption Act was done to pass on advantage to the accused because of the stringent conditions specified in that enactment. We also find force in the argument of the respondents that non-mentioning of offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, in fact, facilitated speedy investigation without going through the rigours of procedural formalities. Understood thus, it is the accused who should be making this grievance and not the petitioners. Suffice it to observe that non-mentioning of offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act cannot be the basis to doubt the credibility of the STF investigating the crime nor does it reflect

¶423

¶424

on their ability, efficiency or impartiality.

¶425

35. The next point urged is that the investigation reveals involvement of high Government officials including the senior police officials, former Minister and personal staff members in the office of the Chief Minister and the Governor. The fact that involvement of these persons has been revealed and has been honestly recorded in the statements prepared by the STF belies the apprehension founded on these facts. Moreso, from the record, it is indisputable that the Investigation Team has proceeded against one and all involved in the crime and succeeded in arresting officials of VYAPAM as well as personal staff of Ex-Minister. Rewards are announced to facilitate arrest of high placed police officials and including relative of Inspector General of Police, Sonali Mishra. This would lend assurance to the fairness and impartiality in the investigation done by the STF.

¶426

36. It was next contended that the STF was focusing more on arrest of students allegedly involved in the offence in question. Further, the students should be, at best, made witnesses against scamsters but not accused. This submission is founded more on morality than legality. If the students are the ultimate beneficiaries, they will inevitably be members of conspiracy and ought to be proceeded on that basis, as accused, along with scamsters. They cannot be mere witnesses, as is suggested. The fact that 84 students

¶427

¶428

have been arrested by the STF so far does not mean that the STF is partial or was not focusing on the racketeers and scamsters. It has already arrested 15 racketeers and four VYAPAM officials as per the record and the process to arrest other high profile/important persons is already in progress. We, therefore, reject the argument that the investigation is biased and is focused against the students and lower functionaries, as contended.

¶429

37. It was then argued that proper statements have not been recorded by STF to shield high profile/important persons. Even this submission does not commend to us. For, the investigation already made and steps taken to register new cases upon revelations made during the investigation of FIR No.539/2013, belies this apprehension.

¶430

38. We have no difficulty in accepting the argument that truth must not be a casualty because of imperfect investigation. However, at the same time, it is not possible to assume that the investigation done by STF thus far is biased, unfair and under pressure. That plea must be rejected.

¶431

39. As a matter of fact, when these matters were posted for hearing on 12^th February, 2014, this Court passed the following order:

¶432

“We have heard learned amicus curiae in W.P. No.21553/2013.

¶433

We wanted to ascertain how the relief

¶434

¶435

claimed in the petition originally filed on 2^nd September, 2013 to refer the investigation to CBI is still relevant. We had that doubt because it is noticed from the record that the State Government realising the seriousness of the allegation and the situation deemed it appropriate to constitute Special Task Force (STF), an independent investigating agency on 26th August, 2013. The said investigating agency has continued with the investigation since then and filed police report from time to time before the concerned Criminal Court. The Criminal Court is already in sesin of the said reports and including about the manner of investigation being done by the STF. In the original petition, as filed, there is no allegation of mala fide or the case made out in the petition that the State Government intends to appoint STF to give decent burial to entire episode. No allegations of mala fide in that behalf are found in the petition or the subsequent proceedings. Similarly, no further affidavit has been filed to specifically point out the inaction of the STF in any area of investigation or for that matter intentional or deliberate attempt to derail the investigation or take the same to its logical end.

¶436

Since the learned amicus curiae has been appointed only yesterday, as requested by the petitioners, who were appearing in person before us, we deem it appropriate to give some time to learned amicus curiae to examine all these aspects to justify the relief, as claimed in the petition. We accordingly defer the hearing of these matters till 11^th March, 2014, to be listed under caption “After Notice”.

¶437

Office to furnish complete set of paperbook of W.P. No.21553/2013 to the learned amicus curiae within one week from today.

¶438

Registry to ensure that appearance of learned amicus curiae is notified on the Board in connection with W.P. No.21553/2013 on future dates.”

¶439

40. The petitioners were expected to bring some concrete

¶440

¶441

circumstances but during the arguments, have chosen to raise points which are only in the realm of gesticulation. Reliance placed on the affidavit of Dilraj Singh Baghel, who incidentally happens to be the Investigating Officer of STF, to contend that he has virtually conceded that no investigation with regard to 10 registered cases would be possible for want of record with VYAPAM. This averment, in our opinion, is being read out of context. Reply filed by the respondents on 10^th January, 2014 in W.P. No.1449/2014 deals with each point urged by the petitioners. No doubt preliminary objection has been raised by the respondents that the present petitions are politically motivated and in support of that argument antecedents of each of the petitioners have been pointed out as belonging to opponent political parties. The affidavit of Ashish Khare, AIG, STF then deals with the merits of the controversy refuting the apprehension of the petitioners and also highlighting that investigation is still in progress and supplementary challan will be filed in cases where charge-sheet has already been filed. It is also stated that intimation to the concerned Head of the Department against the Government officials, who are found involved in the commission of offence, has already been sent for taking appropriate action. Further, intimation has been given to Director, Enforcement Directorate, Indore to take appropriate steps at their level against the responsible persons having indulged in huge money transactions,

¶442

¶443

which has come to light during the investigation. In other words, multi-pronged approach has been adopted while ensuring that the investigation of cases already entrusted to STF; and the new cases registered on the basis of information divulged during the investigation of the case under investigation will be taken to its logical end with utmost dispatch.

¶444

41. It is stated that in PMT scam case, until now, no Minister is accused of his involvement in any crime. Name of Ex-Minister Laxmikant Sharma has come on record in connection with Crime No.19/2013 and Crime No.20/2013, which are concerning Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-II and III Eligibility Test 2011. He has been named as accused in those cases after his involvement came to light during the investigation of PMT 2013 case (in Crime No.539/2013). For, one hard disk was seized from the Senior System Analyst, Nitin Mohindra. The data of the said hard disk was retrieved from the DST, Gandhi Nagar, Gujarat. That retrieved data is being examined thoroughly by STF. The affidavit mentions that (read till filing of that affidavit), sufficient corroborating evidence for arrest of Laxmikant Sharma was not available, as a result of which his arrest has not been made. As aforesaid, assurance has been given on behalf of the respondents that follow up action will be taken with utmost dispatch in connection with that crime.

¶445

42. It is also noted that Dr. Vinod Bhandari, Chairman of

¶446

¶447

Shri Aurobindo Institute of Medical Sciences, Indore, has been arrested in connection with Crime No.12/2013 pertaining to PMT 2012. He is also accused in Pre-P.G. Examination 2012 in Crime No.14/2013. Investigation is also on going in connection with the involvement of other scamsters/racketeers and conspirators on the basis of information divulged during the investigation.

¶448

43. Suffice it to observe that the averment in paragraph 12 of the affidavit of Dilraj Singh Baghel will be of no avail. That cannot be read out of context. The STF is investigating all the crimes concerning examinations conducted by VYAPAM and investigation in each crime will necessarily be independent. It is possible that, as the investigation of these cases progress, a common thread may emerge indicating complicity of some racketeers and conspirators. The factual position stated in the affidavit of Ashish Khare, AIG, STF dated 10^th March, 2014, about the steps taken by the Investigating Team, if kept in mind, the criticism or apprehension based on the averment in paragraph 12 of the affidavit of Dilraj Singh Baghel dated 8^th February, 2012, will have to be rejected. We, therefore, reject the argument that no attempt is being made by the Investigating Team to gather material in connection with the alleged crimes.

¶449

44. It was then contended that the STF is under control of State Government and for that reason no free and fair investigation

¶450

¶451

will be possible. This argument, to say the least, is presumptuous. The fact that STF is one of the wing of the State Government does not mean that it will not carry out investigation independently and impartially or will act on the instructions from higher Authorities. For that matter, even CBI, as of now, is under the control of the Union of India and not an independent or autonomous Agency. The apprehension will have to be tested on the basis of the composition of the STF. As has been noted earlier, no case has been made out even to remotely suggest that any official(s) of STF is under political influence or is taking instructions from higher Authorities. If that had been the case, there was no reason for STF to register new cases and involving high officials and political leaders. It is the investigation of STF which has resulted in unravelling of similar offences committed in the past and in respect of which fresh cases have been registered. The structure of STF nowhere indicates that STF has to report to any other Authority in respect of the investigation of the concerned offences. There is no record even to remotely suggest that information regarding the stage of investigation or the contents of the material are being divulged or reported to the Minister In-charge. Like any other investigation, the Investigating Officer is in complete control of the investigation and the superior officer in the STF would only supervise that the investigation is progressing in right direction. The Head of the STF is

¶452

¶453

an experienced IPS Officer of the rank of A.D.G.P. The fact that the offence has been registered against the relative of I.G. and also against D.I.G. of the Police Department himself, this in itself is indicative of free and fair investigation done by the STF. Hence, this apprehension will have to be negatived.

¶454

45. The argument that the investigation done by STF is moving at a snail's pace also does not commend to us. We are inclined to take this view after having gone through the compilation of documents and information produced in sealed cover for our perusal. No doubt, the first FIR was registered on 7th July, 2013, but, having regard to the complexity of the crime and involvement of large number of persons, it is very natural that the investigation of such organized crime may take some time. But, that does not mean that the investigation is not free and fair. Assurance has been given on behalf of STF that if additional work force is required, such requisition will be sent to the State Government and it will be ensured that the investigation of all the cases referred to it are taken to its logical end with utmost dispatch. To ensure that this assurance given by STF is fulfilled, we may consider of monitoring the investigation of STF in respect of each of those cases. This will redress the apprehension of the petitioners and also instil confidence in investigation of public at large.

¶455

¶456

46. It was then contended that no investigation has been done with regard to admissions in private colleges. This submission is in ignorance of the fact that the investigation assigned to STF is in respect of examinations conducted by VYAPAM in relation to admissions in Government colleges and Government seats in private colleges. The STF is not concerned with the admissions given against the management quota seats by private colleges. Till now nothing has come to light that even in regard to that admission process similar irregularities much less offence has been committed. As and when that question arises, the same will have to be dealt with independently by the Authorities. Suffice it to observe that the scope of investigation assigned to STF is limited to admission/selection process on the basis of examinations conducted by VYAPAM.

¶457

47. It was then contended that STF has not bothered to collect call details of students, parents or VYAPAM officials until now. That material would disclose the culpability of the concerned person. It is not necessary for us to discuss about the details of investigation done so far - as in most of the cases where challan/police report has been filed, further investigation is pending and in remaining cases investigation is still going on. We are not very sure about the intention of the petitioners in calling upon STF to reveal the details of the investigation already done, which, inevitably, may give clue to the accused persons, if discussed in public domain.

¶458

¶459

That is bound to impair the investigation and cannot be countenanced.

¶460

48. Reliance was placed on news items appearing in local newspapers. We may hasten to add that the question under consideration cannot be answered on the basis of those news reports much less to accede to the request of transfer of investigation to CBI. On the basis of the said news reports, it was submitted that no action is being taken against high officials/important persons. We have already dealt with this aspect in the earlier part of the judgment and that needs no further elaboration. The fact that the news reports indicate that the D.G.P. had approached the top political leader of the party in power to explain the circumstances in which her name had appeared in the statement, is no reflection on the fairness and impartiality of the STF. It is nobody's case that the said D.G.P. is associated with the investigation done by STF or that any official of STF had contacted any political leader. The D.G.P. is certainly a high official, but, as is noticed earlier, STF in this case has proceeded even against the D.I.G. and the relative of I.G. If such high officials of Police Department could not influence the STF, it would be preposterous to conclude that the investigation by STF is not free and fair.

¶461

¶462

49. It was argued that the information regarding almost 38 forms of scorers were filled online from one common web portal at Kanpur and that information was made available by some hacker. No attempt has been made by STF to get such information on its own. In response, it has been submitted by the respondents that STF had taken all measures including assistance of computer experts and has now included officials from Cyber Crime Cell who are I.T. experts. Besides, the STF is free to take assistance for the purpose of investigation from other police branches such as Cyber Crime Cell and C.I.D. That does not mean that STF is not well equipped to investigate the offence. Further, the information such as this, if relevant, we have no manner of doubt that the investigating team will ponder over the same and also try to obtain similar information from their own sources. Beyond this, nothing more is required to be said about this contention.

¶463

50. It was argued that the State has the duty and must discharge its role of parens patriae . We find this argument to be completely misplaced. From the facts on record, it is noticed that the State has taken all steps in right earnest immediately after registration of FIR on 7^th July, 2013, realizing the complexity and magnitude of the crime by constituting STF on 26th August, 2013. Besides that, the State Government has shown complete commitment to strengthen the organizational structure of STF and to provide them

¶464

¶465

with adequate logistical support to ensure free and fair investigation of all the cases entrusted to STF.

¶466

51. Similarly, the argument that no case has been registered against Invigilators or Supervisors who were in control of the Examination Centers also deserves to be rejected. From the case made out in the FIR and the material available during the investigation, STF showed sensitivity of registering new FIRs and naming persons involved in the commission of the concerned crime. Moreover, as the investigation is still on going in most of the cases; and also further investigation in some of the cases where challan/police report has been filed, if involvement of any person is disclosed, there is no reason why the investigating officer will leave out such Invigilator or Supervisor, when high officials and political leaders have already been named. There is no reason to assume that the investigation is not done from all angles. It is pertinent to mention that investigation of each crime will have to proceed on the basis of the information disclosed in relation to the commission of that crime. The crimes may pertain to different examinations, different locations and for different years. Each of those cases which are already assigned and to be taken over by the STF, will have to be investigated independently but under one roof.

¶467

¶468

52. It was argued that the Government was fully aware of the impending problem, but, did not take any measures to prevent the same nor is serious about the investigation of those offences. No doubt, reliance was placed on inter departmental communication and the statements recorded in Legislative Assembly proceedings. We have already found that the STF, as constituted, consists of experienced and impartial officials. STF is already busy with the investigation of the offences registered and during the course of investigation of the registered offence, when it was disclosed that similar offences were committed in the past, immediately registered separate FIRs for those offences as well. According to the respondents, till registration of FIR on 7^th July, 2013 and investigation done by the STF, nobody had imagined that mass scale organized crime was being resorted to. The offences, which came to light were considered to be solitary cases of copying or impersonation. On that premise, FIRs were registered in the past. But, it is only in 2013, the entire conspiracy of racketeers came in public domain. Suffice it to observe that the issue under consideration cannot be answered on the basis of said communications or the factual position stated before the Legislative Assembly. We do not deem it necessary nor will it be appropriate to examine the contention that misleading or wrong answers were given

¶469

¶470

before the Legislative Assembly, as that is not the scope of these petitions.

¶471

53. In response to the argument as to the outcome of the FIRs registered in the past, information was placed before us about the status of those FIRs. Assurance has been given that investigation of those FIRs will now stand transferred to STF as it pertains to examinations conducted by VYAPAM and will be taken to its logical end with utmost dispatch.

¶472

54. Taking overall view of the matter, we are more than convinced that as of now, the relief as claimed in each of these petitions to transfer the investigation to CBI is devoid of merits.

¶473

55. Having said this, we may have to consider one of the two other options available, namely, of appointing Special Investigating Team (SIT) or the Court to monitor the investigation done by STF. From the conclusions reached by us after analysis of the issues raised by the petitioners, as of now, we do not see any reason either to transfer the investigation to CBI or appoint SIT to investigate these offences. For, we are convinced that the STF is investigating with due dispatch. Nevertheless, to instill confidence in the investigation of public at large, we may opt for the third option of monitoring the investigation done by the STF. That would subserve the ends of justice and hopefully also motivate the STF to do its job well, in

¶474

¶475

accordance with law. Merely because these petitions have been filed or some news reports appear in the media, as observed by the Apex Court in the case of Sheela Ramesh Kini (supra) , that cannot be the basis to transfer the investigation to some other investigating agency. Similarly, in the case of Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights ( supra ), the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court has opined that the very plenitude of the power bestowed in the Court requires great caution in its exercise. Unless, there is some material to doubt, even, prima facie, about the credibility of the investigation done by the STF, the question of resorting to transfer of investigation as a matter of routine or merely because petitioner has levelled some allegations against STF would certainly not justify the order of transfer of investigation from STF to some other agency. The material on record and the information shared with us in sealed cover by the STF, does not permit us to hold that the investigation by STF is likely to be influenced, in any manner. Subsequent FIRs registered after taking over of investigation by STF, indisputably, are on the basis of information given by officials of STF. Suffice it to observe that merely because involvement of high officials and including police officials and political leaders has come to light, does not make the case rare and exceptional case so as to transfer the investigation - without the finding that there is prima facie case that the investigation by the STF is influenced by those persons.

¶476

¶477

56. We may now refer to the decisions on which reliance was placed on behalf of the petitioners. The first decision is in the case of Prof. K.V. Rajendran (supra). In paragraph 14, the Apex Court relied on its earlier decision in Rubabbuddin Sheikh v. State of Gujarat & others²⁵ and noted that where the accusation is made against high officials of the police department of the State in respect of killing of persons in a fake encounter and the Gujarat police after the conclusion of the investigation, submitted a charge sheet before the competent criminal court, that investigation done by the State investigating agency was not satisfactory. In order to do justice and instill confidence in the minds of the victims as well as of the public, the State police authority could not be allowed to continue with the investigation when allegations and offences were mostly against top officials. These observations were made in the fact situation of that case. On the other hand, in para 10 of the same judgment, the Apex Court has expounded that it is well settled position that the Court could exercise its Constitutional powers for transferring an investigation from the State investigating agency to any other independent agency like CBI only in rare and exceptional cases. It then went on to observe that where high officials of State Authorities are involved, or the accusation itself is against the top officials of the investigating agency which may influence the investigation, are such

¶478

25 (2010) 2 SCC 200

¶479

¶480

matters which should be transferred to CBI. No doubt, in the present case, high officials including from police department have been named as accused, but, there is no convincing material to take the view that the investigation done by the STF, which is a specialized and dedicated team for investigation of organized crime, is unsatisfactory or biased. On the other hand, STF has proceeded against one and all whose name is disclosed and divulged during the investigation.

¶481

57. Reliance was then placed on Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar (supra). In paragraph 75 the Court observed thus:

¶482

“75. Thus, in view of the above, it is evident that a constitutional court can direct CBI to investigate into the case provided the court after examining the allegations in the complaint reaches a conclusion that the complainant could make out prima facie, a case against the accused. However, the person against whom the investigation is sought, is to be impleaded as a party and must be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. CBI cannot be directed to have a roving inquiry as to whether a person was involved in the alleged unlawful activities. The court can direct CBI investigation only in exceptional circumstances where the court is of the view that the accusation is against a person who by virtue of his post could influence the investigation and it may prejudice the cause of the complainant, and it is necessary so to do in order to do complete justice and make the investigation credible.”

¶483

In the case of Rajender Singh Pathania (supra), the Court in

¶484

paragraph 14 has restated that the court must also be satisfied that the investigation has not been proceeded in a proper direction or it

¶485

¶486

has been biased. In absence of that finding, as observed by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in the case of The Committee

¶487

for Protection of Democratic Rights (supra), and in the case of Sheela Ramesh Kini (supra) , transfer of investigation to CBI merely because of public outcry cannot be sustained.

¶488

58. In the case of Disha (supra) , the Court restated the principle expounded in the case of Narmada Bai (supra ). In para 21 the Court observed thus:

¶489

“21. Thus, it is evident that this Court has transferred the matter to CBI or any other special agency only when the Court was satisfied that the accused had been a very powerful and influential person or State authorities like high police officials were involved and the investigation had not been proceeded with in a proper direction or it had been biased. In such a case, in order to do complete justice and having belief that it would lend the final outcome of the investigation credibility, such directions have been issued.

¶490

59. In the case of Narmada Bai (supra), the Court relied on

¶491

its earlier decision in the case of Rubabbuddin Sheikh (supra) and

¶492

concluded in para 27 as under :

¶493

“27. …………. It is clear that in an appropriate case, particularly, when the Court feels that the investigation by the State police authorities is not in the proper direction as the high police officials are involved, in order to do complete justice, it is always open to the Court to hand over the investigation to an independent and specialised agency like CBI.”

¶494

(emphasis supplied)

¶495

60. As aforesaid, in the present case, as of now, it is not

¶496

¶497

possible to hold that the investigation done by STF is not in proper direction or it will not go in proper direction because of involvement of high officials and political leaders. That possibility is presently ruled out because STF after taking over the investigation on its own has recorded statements disclosing the culpability of high officials and political leaders. On the basis of those statements - as commission of similar offences in the past came to light, fresh FIRs have been registered against the named high officials. Notably, the STF, constituted by the State Government, consists of experienced and impartial officers with unblemished record. Suffice it to observe that none of the decisions, pressed into service by the petitioners, have taken the view that as soon as involvement of high officials is alleged, those cases must necessarily be transferred to CBI. Further, in most of those cases, the investigation was done by local police of the State and not by high powered Special Task Force as is constituted in the present case. It is well established that the Court must first find that the investigation done by the State Investigating Agency is not proceeding in proper direction and is influenced by high officials/political leaders. Suffice it to observe that the conclusion reached in the case of Narmada Bai (supra) was in the fact situation of that case.

¶498

61. In the case of Vikas Kumar Roorkewal vs. State of Uttarakhand (supra) , in paragraph 23 the Apex Court has noted

¶499

¶500

that the apprehension of the party must be reasonable apprehension and not mere allegation that there is apprehension that justice will not be done. That cannot be the basis to transfer the case. In that case, the Court recorded a finding that the petitioner was able to make out prima facie case of reasonable apprehension that there would be failure of justice and acquittal of accused because witnesses were being threatened. In other words, the Court is obliged to record a clear finding on the factum of reasonableness of the apprehension entertained by the petitioners.

¶501

62. Reliance was placed on observations in paragraphs 2 and 5 in the case of Mrs. Maneka Sanjay Gandhi (supra) . We may usefully reproduce para 2 of the said decision. The same reads thus:

¶502

“2. Assurance of a fair trial is the first imperative of the dispensation of justice and the central criterion for the court to consider when a motion for transfer is made is not the hypersensitivity or relative convenience of a party or easy availability of legal services or like more mini-grievances. Something substantial, more compelling, more imperilling, from the point of view of public justice and its attendant environment, is necessitous if the Court is to exercise its power of transfer. This is the cardinal principle although the circumstances may be myriad and vary from case to case. We have to test the petitioner’s grounds on this touchstone bearing in mind the rule that normally the complainant has the right to choose any court having jurisdiction and the accused cannot dictate where the case against him should be tried. Even so, the process of justice should not harass the parties and from

¶503

¶504

that angle the court may weigh the circumstances.”

¶505

(emphasis supplied)

¶506

We may also advert to para 5 of that decision. This decision is relied to buttress the point as to what must be considered as reasonable apprehension. We fail to understand as to how this decision will be of any avail to the petitioners and, more so, in the fact situation of the present case. Firstly, that decision is in the context of provisions contained in Section 406 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Secondly, we have already dealt with the apprehensions of the petitioners and found that the same are devoid of merits. Moreover, the direct judgment on the point is of the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in the case of The Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (supra) , which ought to govern the present case.

¶507

63. Reliance placed on the decision in the case of Gurcharan Dass Chadha vs. State of Rajasthan (supra), which is also dealing with Section 527 of the old Code of Criminal Procedure, is inapplicable to the present case, for the same reasons noted while dealing with the earlier judgment in Mrs. Maneka Sanjay Gandhi’s case.

¶508

64. Reliance was also placed on the recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of Manohar Lal Sharma (supra) to contend that the scope of monitoring of investigation by the Court will be limited. Emphasis was placed on paragraphs 38 to 40 of the

¶509

¶510

said decision, which reads thus:

¶511

“38. The monitoring of investigations/ inquiries by the Court is intended to ensure that proper progress takes place without directing or channeling the mode or manner of investigation. The whole idea is to retain public confidence in the impartial inquiry/ investigation into the alleged crime; that inquiry/investigation into every accusation is made on a reasonable basis irrespective of the position and status of that person and the inquiry/investigation is taken to the logical conclusion in accordance with law. The monitoring by the Court aims to lend credence to the inquiry/investigation being conducted by the CBI as premier investigating agency and to eliminate any impression of bias, lack of . fairness and objectivity therein

¶512

39. However, the investigation/inquiry monitored by the court does not mean that the court supervises such investigation/inquiry. To supervise would mean to observe and direct the execution of a task whereas to monitor would only mean to maintain surveillance. The concern and interest of the court in such ‘court directed’ or ‘court monitored’ cases is that there is no undue delay in the investigation, and the investigation is conducted in a free and fair manner with no external interference. In such a process, the people acquainted with facts and circumstances of the case would also have a sense of security and they would cooperate with the investigation given that the superior courts are seized of the matter. We find that in some cases, the expression ‘court monitored’ has been interchangeably used with ‘court supervised investigation’. Once the court supervises an investigation, there is hardly anything left in the trial. Under the Code, the investigating officer is only to form an opinion and it is for the court to ultimately try the case based on the opinion formed by the investigating officer and see whether any

¶513

¶514

offence has been made out. If a superior court supervises the investigation and thus facilitates the formulation of such opinion in the form of a report under Section 173(2) of the Code, it will be difficult if not impossible for the trial court to not to be influenced or bound by such opinion. Then trial becomes a farce. Therefore, supervision of investigation by any court is a contradiction in terms. The Code does not envisage such a procedure, and it cannot either. In the rare and compelling circumstances referred to above, the superior courts may monitor an investigation to ensure that the investigating agency conducts the investigation in a free, fair and time-bound manner without . any external interference

¶515

40. The Court is of the view that a fair, proper and full investigation by the CBI into every accusation by the CBI in respect of allocation of coal blocks shall help in retaining public confidence in the conduct of inquiry/investigation. Moreover, the Courtmonitoring in a matter of huge magnitude such as this shall help in moving the machinery of inquiry/investigation at appropriate pace and its conclusion with utmost expedition without fear or favour.”

¶516

(emphasis supplied)

¶517

Reliance was also placed on the concurring view in paragraphs 50,

¶518

61 and 94 on the scope of monitoring, which reads thus :

¶519

“50. When Court monitors the investigation, there is already departure inasmuch as the investigating agency informs the Court about the progress of the investigation. Once the constitutional court monitors the inquiry/investigation which is only done in extraordinary circumstances and in exceptional situation having regard to the larger public interest, the inquiry/investigation into the crime under the PC Act against public servants by the CBI must be allowed to have its course

¶520

¶521

unhindered and uninfluenced and the procedure contemplated by Section 6A cannot be put at the level which impedes exercise of constitutional power by the Supreme Court under Articles 32, 136 and 142 of the Constitution. Any other view in this regard will be directly inconsistent with the power conferred on the highest constitutional court.

¶522

61. At the outset, one must appreciate that a constitutional court monitors an investigation by the State police or the Central Bureau of Investigation (for short the CBI) only and only in public interest. That is the leitmotif of a . constitutional court monitored investigation No constitutional court ‘desires’ to monitor an inquiry or an investigation (compendiously referred to hereafter as an investigation) nor does it encourage the monitoring of any investigation by a police authority, be it the State police or the CBI. Public interest is the sole consideration and a constitutional court monitors an investigation only when circumstances compel it to do so, such as (illustratively) a lack of enthusiasm by the investigating officer or agency (due to ‘pressures’ on it) in conducting a proper investigation, or a lack of enthusiasm by the concerned Government in assisting the investigating authority to arrive at the truth, or a lack of interest by the investigating authority or the concerned Government to take the investigation to its logical conclusion for whatever reason, or in extreme cases, to hinder . the investigation

¶523

94. Finally, a constitutional court monitored investigation is nothing but the adoption of a procedure of a ‘continuing mandamus’ which traces its origin, like public interest litigation, to Article 32 of the Constitution and is our contribution to jurisprudence. This has been sufficiently discussed in Vineet Narain vs. Union of India, (1998) 1 SCC 226 and there is no present necessity of any further discussions on this. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of

¶524

¶525

India, (2008) 1 SCC 407 this Court referred, in the context of ongoing investigations, to a ‘continuous mandamus’ and observed that: ( M.C. Mehta case, SCC p. 412, para 9)

¶526

“9……. The jurisdiction of the Court to issue a writ of continuous mandamus is only to see that proper investigation is carried out. Once the Court satisfies itself that a has been proper investigation carried out, it would not venture to take over the functions of the Magistrate or pass any order which would interfere with his judicial functions.”

¶527

65. In the case of Sanjiv Kumar (supra), cited by Shri

¶528

Shekhar Sharma, Advocate, the stand of the State was to allow it to entrust the inquiry into the allegation to a Commission of Inquiry, assisted by a special Investigating Task Force. The Apex Court rejected that plea and considering the facts of that case in paragraph 15 noted thus:

¶529

“15. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, looking at the nature of the allegations made and the mighty people who are alleged to be involved, we are of the opinion, that the better option of the two is to entrust the matter to investigation by CBI. We are well aware, as was also told to us during the course of hearing, that the hands of CBI are full and the present one would be an additional load on their head to carry. Yet, the fact remains that CBI as a Central investigating agency enjoys independence and confidence of the people. It can fix its priorities and programme the progress of investigation suitably so as to see that any inevitable

¶530

¶531

delay does not prejudice the investigation of the present case. They can think of acting fast for the purpose of collecting such vital evidence, oral and documentary, which runs the risk of being obliterated by lapse of time. The rest can afford to wait for a while. We hope that the investigation would be entrusted by the Director, CBI to an officer of unquestioned independence and then monitored so as to reach a successful conclusion; the truth is discovered and the guilty dragged into the net of law. Little people of this country, have high hopes from CBI, the prime investigating agency which works and gives results. We hope and trust the sentinels in CBI would justify the confidence of the people and this Court reposed in them.”

¶532

However, in view of the opinion already recorded by us, in the fact

¶533

situation of the present case, monitoring of the investigation by this

¶534

Court may instill confidence in investigation of common man.

¶535

66. Another decision relied by Shri Shekhar Sharma, Advocate and Shri A.M. Trivedi, Senior Advocate, is the case of Nirmal Singh Kahlon (supra) . The Court observed thus:

¶536

“28. An accused is entitled to a fair investigation. Fair investigation and fair trial are concomitant to preservation of fundamental right of an accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. But the State has a larger obligation i.e. to maintain law and order, public order and preservation of peace and harmony in the society. A victim of a crime, thus, is equally entitled to a fair investigation. When serious allegations were made against a former Minister of the State, save and except the cases of political revenge amounting to malice, it is

¶537

¶538

for the State to entrust one or the other agency for the purpose of investigating into the matter. The State for achieving the said object at any point of time may consider handing over of investigation to any other agency including a central agency which has acquired specialization in such cases.

¶539

In an ordinary case, we might have accepted the submission of Mr. Rao that the High Court should not direct Central Bureau of Investigation to investigate into a particular offence. The offence, however, is not ordinary in nature. It involved investigation into the allegations of commission of fraud in a systematic manner. It had a wide ramification as a former Minister of the State is said to be involved.”

¶540

The observations in this decision will have to be understood in the

¶541

fact situation of that case where the State Government wanted CBI to enquire into the matter but the CBI was unwilling to take up that responsibility. In the present case, the investigation is entrusted by the State to a specialized and dedicated team of experienced and impartial police officials constituting Special Task Force.

¶542

67. In the case of Secretary, Minor Irrigation & Rural Engineering Services, U.P. and others (supra) , relied by Shri Siddharth Seth, Advocate, in paragraph 6 the Court, in fact, restated the principle that transferring of case to CBI should not be done mechanically and in routine manner because of some allegations found in the petition. The Court has held that a definite conclusion must be reached about prima facie case. The Court cannot proceed

¶543

¶544

on the basis of “ifs” and “buts”. This decision would in our view, help the respondents in the facts of the present case.

¶545

68. We have already adverted to the recent Constitution Bench decision of the Apex Court in the case of The Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (supra) which has restated this very principle and we have analyzed the matter keeping in mind that

¶546

principle.

¶547

69. In the case of Vishwanath Chaturvedi (3) (supra), cited by Shri Trivedi, Senior Advocate, in paragraphs 37 and 38, the Apex Court observed thus:

¶548

“37. The ultimate test, in our view, therefore, is whether the allegations have any substance. An enquiry should not be shut out at the threshold because a political opponent of a person with political difference raises an allegation of commission of offence. Therefore, we mould the prayer in the writ petition and direct the CBI to enquire into alleged acquisition of wealth by respondent Nos. 2-5 and find out as to whether the allegations made by the petitioner in regard to disproportionate assets to the known source of income of respondent Nos. 2-5 is correct or not and submit a report to the Union of India and on receipt of such report, the Union of India may take further steps depending upon the outcome of the preliminary enquiry into the assets of respondent Nos. 2-5.

¶549

38. In the instant case, it needs to be noted that we are concerned in this case not with the merits of the allegations. The present petition is filed on acquisition of alleged wealth.”

¶550

¶551

This observation was in the fact situation of that case, as the Court accepted the plea that the statements recorded would require expertise in the field of accounting and in the valuation and that investigation ought to be entrusted to independent agency such as CBI.

¶552

70. In the case of Sampat Lal (supra), reliance was placed

¶553

on paragraphs 13, 14 and 15, which read thus:

¶554

“13. Before we proceed to closely examine the submissions advanced by counsel for the parties, it is proper to clear the ground and formulate the exact points which require examination. It is certainly not for this Court at the present stage to examine and come to a conclusion as to whether this was a case of suicide or murder. If as a result of investigation, evidence is gathered and a trial takes place the Sessions Judge will decide that controversy and it may be that in due course such controversy may be canvassed before this Court in some form or the other. It would, therefore, be wholly inappropriate at this stage to enter such a question. One of the controversies which loomed large before the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court was as to the appointment of the DIG, CBI to inquire into the matter in the absence of proper consent of the State Government. That question has not been recanvassed before us and it has been accepted by counsel for all the parties including the Additional Solicitor General that while section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1916 ('Act' for short) would require the consent of the State Government before jurisdiction under s. 5 of that Act is exercised by officers of that establishment, when a direction is given by the Court in an appropriate case, consent envisaged under s. 6 of the Act would not be a condition precedent

¶555

¶556

to compliance with the Court's direction. In our considered opinion, s. 6 of the Act does not apply when the Court gives a direction to the CBI to conduct an investigation and counsel for the parties rightly did not dispute this position. In this view, the impugned order of the learned single judge and the appellate decision of the Division Bench appointing DIG, CBI to inquire into the matter would not be open to attack for want of sanction under s. 6 of the Act.

¶557

Four questions appear to survive for examination:

¶558

(1) Effect of violation of the Rules of Natural Justice on the order:-

¶559

This can be sub-divided into two aspects: (i) Whether the order of the single judge is vitiated having been made in violation of rules of natural justice ?

¶560

(ii) Whether that order is also bad as the learned single judge had not cared to inform himself as to the stage of investigation and if there was any lacuna therein ?

¶561

(2) What exactly is the role meant to be played by the Special officer and whether the inquiry contemplated to be carried on by him would affect the investigation which was being conducted by the local police authorities?

¶562

(3) Is it open to the Court to interfere with the investigation which is still proceeding and what are the circumstances in which such interference, if any, is possible, and the guidelines to be followed in such matter?

¶563

(4) Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the direction given by the single judge and upheld with certain modifications by the Division Bench was proper?

¶564

As already point out, power vests in the police authorities of the State Government for conducting investigation into allegations relating to an offence. However, the stand taken by the respondents was that the State Government and the police authorities had not

¶565

¶566

acted properly and the investigation was not being conducted as required by law. As appears from the order of June 7, 1983, Borooah, J. directed notice to issue to the State of West Bengal as also to the other authorities concerned to show cause against the issue of a writ. No hearing was, however, afforded to the State Government or its officers when direction to appoint the Special officer in whom power of inquiry was to be vested, was made. There could be no scope for appointing a special officer unless the statutory channel of investigation was found not to have functioned properly. There was no basis at that stage to assume that the contents of the letters as also the facts stated in the columns of the newspaper had not been contradicted It was the State Government or its officers who alone could have authoritatively indicated the facts showing whether the allegations contained in the letters or the newspaper reports were true and if so, to what extent, or how the investigation was being carried on and what stage it had reached so as to enable the Court to come to a prima facie conclusion that the State Government and the police authorities were not discharging properly their statutory obligation to carry out an investigation. But when no notice was given to the State Government and no opportunity was offered to them, it is difficult to see how an exparte order could be made on such an assumption When we say this, we do not wish to be understood to say that in no case an exparte order can be made by the Court If the faces stated in the letter or the writ petition are credible and there is such urgency that the ends of justice might be defeated by not making an ex - parte order or giving of notice without exparte order might lead to aggravation of oppression or exploitation or removal or elimination of evidence, the Court would certainly be justified in making an ex-parte order. But here there were no such circumstances at all and the Court could have very well issued notice to the Respondents and tried to find out whether there was any

¶567

¶568

necessity for directing the appointment of DIG, CBI to act as A a Special officer and requiring the police authorities of the State to extend all possible help as may be required by him. We are of the view that Borooah, J. should have issued notice to the State Government, afforded a reasonable opportunity to it and its officers who were in session of the already investigation to make a report in regard to the action taken by them and after making an overall judicial assessment of the situation, the need for appointing a Special officer should have been considered.

¶569

The appointment of a Special officer with a direction to inquire into the commission of an offence can only be on the basis that there has not been a proper investigation. There is a well defined hierarchical administrative set up of the police in the State of West Bengal as in all other States and to have created a new channel of inquiry or investigation is likely to create an impression that everything is not well with the statutory agency and it is likely to cast a stigma on the regular policy hierarchy. We are inclined to agree with Mr. Chatterjee for the appellant that in the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping the nature of the order made in view, the direction to appoint a Special officer with powers to inquire should not have been made until the appellants had been given a hearing and the Court had the papers of investigation laid before it for being prima facie satisfied that the investigation had either not been proper or adequate.”

¶570

(emphasis supplied)

¶571

The principle underlying the exposition in this decision, however, must assist the respondents.

¶572

71. The respondents have relied on the recent decision of the

¶573

Apex Court in the case of Muzaffarnagar, decided on 26^th March,

¶574

¶575

2014 (being Writ Petition No.155/2013 and other companion cases). The question as to whether investigation should be transferred to SIT/CBI has been considered from paragraph 72 of this decision. After having analyzed the relevant aspects of that case and, in particular, that the State itself had constituted a Special Investigation Cell (SIC), in paragraph 88 the Court concluded that there was no need to either constitute SIT or entrust the investigation to the CBI, at that juncture. But, for effective and stringent measures, the Court issued direction that the investigation by the SIC shall be monitored by the Court. In this decision, the Apex Court had adverted to earlier Constitution Bench decision and restated that there can be no inflexible rule as to in which matters the Court may transfer the investigation to independent agency. At the same time, observed that the extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situation; such as, (i) where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instill confidence in investigation; (ii) where the incident may have national and international ramification; and (iii) where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice in enforcing the fundamental rights. In the present case, after analysis of the material produced before us, we are of the opinion that the investigation done by STF, as of now, is proceeding in right direction and without any bias. Having said this, the petitions could be disposed of accordingly.

¶576

¶577

72 . Nevertheless, we deem it appropriate to adopt the option of monitoring investigation done by STF. That would not only instill confidence in that investigation, but, also motivate the investigating team as their actions and performance will be under constant gaze of the Court.

¶578

73 . The decision in Muzaffarnagar case, was sought to be distinguished by the counsel for the petitioners on the argument that, in the present case the officials - be it VYAPAM or from the police department - themselves are involved in the commission of the crime. We have already dealt with this aspect in the earlier part of this judgment and negatived the same.

¶579

74 . The respondents have justly placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of M.C. Abraham (supra) to contend that arrest of an accused is not to be done in a routine and mechanical manner. The investigating officer cannot mechanically arrest the accused as soon as the report is lodged. He can do that only after some investigation to make up his mind whether it is necessary to arrest that accused. Keeping in mind this exposition, the argument of the petitioners to find fault with the investigation by STF on this count cannot be countenanced.

¶580

75 . The respondents relying on the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Prakash Singh (supra) have justly contended

¶581

¶582

that the constitution of STF by the State Government, keeping in mind the magnitude, sensitivity and complexity of the crime in question, can be seen as fulfilment of the observation of the Apex Court. Inasmuch as, a special dedicated investigating team consisting of experienced, independent and impartial senior police officers has been constituted whose commitment, devotion and accountability would be only to the rule of law and they would serve the people without any regard, whatsoever, to the status and position of any person while investigating a crime or taking preventive measures. The approach of the officials of STF would be service oriented and to bring all guilty persons to book with utmost despatch, including high officials in the Government set up and political leaders. The STF officials are not entrusted with any other work, but, are dedicated exclusively to investigate the crime concerning the examinations conducted by VYAPAM.

¶583

76 . Relying on para 97 in the case of Lalita Kumari (supra), V. Jayapaul (supra) and T.T. Antony (supra) , it was contended by the respondents that second FIR registered in connection with the same offence is not unknown nor impermissible in law. Moreover, FIR can be registered by the police itself on any information received by it or on the information furnished by the informant.

¶584

¶585

77. Taking overall view of the matter, therefore, as of now, we are not inclined to accept the prayer for transfer of investigation to other investigating agency. At the same time, in larger public interest, and to instill confidence in the investigation by STF, we deem it appropriate to monitor the investigation done by STF periodically. That will meet the ends of justice.

¶586

78 . As a result, we now proceed to examine the reliefs claimed in the respective petitions:

¶587

(I) (a) In W.P. No.15186/2013, as regards prayer clause No.(i) to (iii), no argument was addressed and further we had occasion to deal with similar plea in Writ Petition No.20342/2013 and other companion matters, decided on 11^th April, 2014, hence this prayer clause cannot be taken forward.

¶588

(b) As regards prayer clause (iv) for entrusting investigation to CBI, for the reasons recorded hitherto, the same will have to be rejected.

¶589

(c) Prayer clause No.(vi) was not pursued during the argument. Moreover, respondents 6 and 7 against whom relief was sought, have been deleted from the array of respondents. Hence, we need not elaborate on this relief any further.

¶590

¶591

(d) Accordingly, this petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶592

(II) (a) As regards Writ Petition No.15404/2013, relief in terms of prayer clause (i) and (ii) is worked out as the Board has already taken action against the concerned candidates and is in the process of identifying other left over candidates, which aspect has been dealt with in the recently decided group of cases, being Writ Petition No.20342/2013 and other companion matters, decided on 11^th April, 2014.

¶593

(b) As regards prayer clause (iii) and (iv), for transfer of investigation to CBI, for the reasons recorded hitherto, the same will have to be rejected.

¶594

¶595

(III) Reverting to Writ Petition No.20219/2013, for the reasons recorded in the judgment and keeping in mind that FIRs regarding concerned examinations have been registered on the basis of information available to the police and the same are being taken to its logical end coupled with the fact that all criminal cases, henceforth, will be investigated by STF, even this petition deserves to be disposed of.

¶596

¶597

(IV) (a) In W.P. No.21251/2013, as regards prayer clause No.(i) and (ii), it was not pursued during the argument. Therefore, the same need not be examined any further. (b) By prayer clause (iii) in substance direction is sought to transfer investigation to CBI. For the reasons already recorded hitherto, this prayer deserves to be rejected.

¶598

(c) In prayer clause (iv) direction is sought against the respondents to inquire into the episode of cancellation of admission of students enblock whereas allowing other students of the previous year to continue their medical course. In the first place, no argument was advanced before us in connection with this relief. Moreover, the incidental issues have already been dealt with in our recent decision in Writ Petition No.20342/2013 and other companion matters, decided on 11^th April, 2014. Accordingly, this relief cannot be taken forward.

¶599

(d) In prayer clause (v) direction is sought against the respondents to reduce equal number of seats from their quota seats and to provide them in State quota seats. Even with regard to this relief, no argument was canvassed before us. The argument that after cancellation of admissions, the vacated seats be treated

¶600

¶601

as State quota, similar plea has been dealt with in our recent decision. Suffice it to observe that even this relief will have to be negatived.

¶602

(e) In prayer clause (vi) direction is sought against the respondents to give admission to the students in the next academic year. Even in respect of this relief, no argument was canvassed before us. Hence, the same need not be considered any further.

¶603

(f) As regards prayer clause (vii), the same is worked out as this petition has been heard along with companion cases.

¶604

(g) Accordingly, even this petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶605

(V) (a) In Writ Petition No.21318/2013, besides the relief of transferring investigation of criminal cases to CBI in respect of pre-medical examinations conducted by VYAPAM in the year 2012, it is further prayed that heavy damages be given to the genuine candidates who deserved seats to MBBS course, but, were denied because of the irregularities committed during the concerned examination.

¶606

100

¶607

(b) As regards the claim for damages, it will be open to the petitioner and similarly placed persons to pursue the same by taking recourse to other appropriate proceedings. We keep that question open. As has been noticed, at the outset, only one issue regarding transfer of investigation of criminal cases to CBI was argued by the counsel for the petitioners. Even for that reason, we are not inclined to examine prayer clause (ii) and keep that relief open.

¶608

¶609

(VI) (a) In W.P. No.21527/2013, the first relief claimed is essentially to transfer the investigation to CBI. That will have to be negatived for the reasons recorded hitherto. (b) The second relief claimed is to declare VYAPAM as black-listed agency. No argument was addressed before us in this behalf. Hence, we do not wish to examine this relief any further.

¶610

(c) Prayer clause (iii) is in the nature of issuing mandamus against respondent No.4 refraining it from conducting other examinations. This relief is dependent on the relief claimed in prayer clause (ii). Even with regard to this relief, no argument was canvassed before

¶611

101

¶612

us. Hence, we do not deem it necessary to examine this prayer clause any further.

¶613

(d) In prayer clause (iv), direction is sought to cancel MPPMT examination and for preparing new programme for examination in a fair and transparent manner. Even with regard to this relief, no argument was canvassed before us. Moreover, similar plea has been negatived by us in the recently decided Writ Petition No.20342/2013 and other companion matters on 11^th April, 2014.

¶614

(e) Accordingly, even this petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶615

(VII) As regards Writ Petition No.21543/2013, for the reasons recorded hitherto, the reliefs claimed in this petition for transfer of investigation to CBI will also have to be rejected. Hence, this petition is being dismissed.

¶616

(VIII) (a) In W.P. No.21553/2013, prayer clause (i) and (v)

¶617

does not survive for consideration in view of the fact that FIRs have been registered in connection with offences concerning the examinations conducted by VYAPAM and the same are being taken to its logical

¶618

end.

¶619

(b) As regards prayer clauses (ii) and (iii), the same deserve to be rejected for the reasons already recorded

¶620

102

¶621

hitherto. For, we are not inclined to transfer the investigation to CBI.

¶622

(c) As regards prayer clause (iv) to issue direction to VYAPAM to conduct fresh examinations, we had occasion to deal with similar plea in Writ Petition No.20342/2013 and other companion matters, decided on 11^th April, 2014, hence this prayer clause is also rejected.

¶623

(d) Accordingly, this writ petition should fail and the same is being dismissed.

¶624

(IX) In Writ Petition No.106/2014, in substance, direction is sought to transfer the investigation to CBI and further to arrest respondent No.5 and all other persons involved in the commission of offence. For the reasons already recorded hitherto, this petition ought to fail and the same deserves to be dismissed.

¶625

(X)

¶626

In Writ Petition No.293/2014, more or less similar reliefs have been claimed as in Writ Petition No.21251/2013. Firstly, to direct the transfer of investigation to CBI, and secondly to direct the Board to conduct fresh examination. For the reasons recorded hitherto, even this petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶627

103

¶628

( XI ) As regards Writ Petition No.1449/2014, only one relief is to direct the CBI to investigate the VYAPAM cases. That prayer will have to be rejected for the reasons recorded hitherto and as a consequence, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶629

( XII ) As regards Writ Petition No.2232/2014, in substances, the relief is to transfer the investigation to CBI. For the reasons recorded hitherto, even this petition ought to be dismissed and disposed of accordingly.

¶630

(XIII) (a) As regards Writ Petition No.2756/2014, prayer clause (i), (ii) and (iii) are essentially to direct transfer of investigation of criminal cases, concerning examinations conducted by VYAPAM since 2008, to CBI. As aforesaid, this relief will have to be rejected for the reasons recorded hitherto. In fact, all criminal cases pertaining to examinations conducted by VYAPAM, already registered and pending investigation as also to be registered hereafter on the basis of new information disclosed, will be dealt with by STF.

¶631

(b) As regards prayer clause (iv), the relief prayed is to direct the State Government to forthwith terminate the services of 1000 persons illegally appointed on the basis of examinations conducted by VYAPAM since 2007 till

¶632

104

¶633

date. No argument was advanced in that behalf before us. The only argument canvassed by Shri K.T.S. Tulsi, learned Senior Advocate for this petitioner, was for issuing direction to transfer the investigation to CBI. (c) Even relief clause (vi), which is independent relief to dissolve VYAPAM was not pursued during the argument. We, therefore, do not deem it necessary to deal with this prayer clause except to mention that the issue regarding the legality, status and authority of the existing Board has already been dealt with in the recent decision, being Writ Petition No.20342/2013 and other companion matters, decided on 11^th April, 2014. Accordingly, even this petition deserves to be disposed of.

¶634

(XIV ) The Writ Petition No.4317/2014 is, essentially, for issuing direction to transfer the investigation to CBI; and further direct the CBI to complete the investigation expeditiously. For the reasons recorded hitherto, even this petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶635

79 . Since we are disposing of all the writ petitions in terms

¶636

of this judgment, we deem it appropriate to treat the question regarding Court monitoring of investigation by STF of all the offences pertaining to examinations conducted by VYAPAM from

¶637

105

¶638

time to time, as suo motu proceedings, and direct the Registry to number the said proceedings accordingly, to be listed on 25^th April, 2014, under Caption “Direction”, for passing appropriate orders.

¶639

80 . In view of above, we proceed to pass the following

¶640

order:

¶641

(i) The abovementioned writ petitions are disposed of on the above terms.

¶642

(ii) Registry is directed to forthwith register suo motu proceedings for Court monitoring of investigation done by STF in respect of all criminal cases pertaining to examinations conducted by VYAPAM from time to time. That matter be listed on 25^th April, 2014 under caption “Direction”.

¶643

(iii) Copy of this order and the documents, which were tendered before us by the respondents during hearing and kept in sealed cover, will remain in sealed cover and as part of the said suo motu proceedings. Besides, the affidavits filed by the respondents in the respective writ petitions from time to time, be kept in suo motu proceedings, as a separate compilation, arranged chronologically date-wise and properly paginated.

¶644

106

¶645

(iv) In the larger public interest, we direct that “further investigation” of FIR No.523/2011 registered with Police Station Tukoganj, Indore in which police report/challan has already been filed by the local police, shall now be transferred with immediate effect to the Special Task Force constituted by the State Government vide Notification dated 26^th August, 2013, so that STF can have complete control over all the pending criminal cases pertaining to examinations conducted by VYAPAM. This direction be brought to the notice of concerned Criminal Court where the trial in respect of FIR No.523/2011 is pending, forthwith, for information and compliance.

¶646

(v) We accept the assurance given by the respondent/State that all criminal cases already registered and to be registered hereafter in connection with examinations conducted by VYAPAM up to 2013 shall be entrusted to Special Task Force, constituted in terms of Notification dated 26^th August, 2013. Compliance report, in this behalf be submitted in the suo motu proceedings to be listed on 25^th April, 2014.

¶647

107

¶648

(vi) All interlocutory applications in the respective

¶649

writ petitions stand disposed of, in terms of this

¶650

order.

¶651

(A.M. KHANWILKAR) (K.K. TRIVEDI) Chief Justice Judge

¶652

DV & S/ �