http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8  

CASE NO.: Contempt Petition (civil)  448 of 2004

PETITIONER: Sanjiv Kumar

RESPONDENT: Om Prakash Chautala & Anr.

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13/05/2005

BENCH: CJI R.C. LAHOTI, D.M. DHARMADHIKARI & G.P. MATHUR

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

In  W.P.(Crl.) No.93/2003  

WITH

T.C.(Crl.) No.7/2004

Sanjiv Kumar                                            \005. Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors.                                   \005.Respondents

WITH

Criminal M.P. Nos.  2322/2005 & 13518/2004 In W.P. (Crl.) No.93/2003

Sanjiv Kumar                                            \005. Petitioner Versus State of Haryana &  Ors.                                \005.Respondents

R.C.  Lahoti, CJI

Writ Petition (Criminal) No.93 of 2003 was filed by Sanjiv  Kumar, an IAS officer of the year 1985 complaining of large  scale corruption and tampering of records in filling up of about  4000 vacancies of JBT teachers in the State of Haryana.   Disposing of the writ petition, vide its order dated 25th  November, 2003, this Court directed the complaint to be  investigated by the CBI.

During the course of hearing of the writ petition, it was  urged on behalf of the petitioner, Sanjiv Kumar that in order to  build pressure on him, certain offences were registered and  departmental proceedings initiated against him wherein he did  not expect a fair investigation or inquiry so long as the matter  was dealt with by the  local officials.  He reposed faith in CBI and  submitted that whatever proceedings/investigation of criminal  nature are pending against him could also be transferred to CBI.  Accordingly, this Court directed not only the investigation into  the offence, the commission whereof was complained by the  petitioner, but also the investigations/proceedings pending  against him to be transferred to CBI.  The following five  investigations/proceedings against the petitioner, Sanjiv Kumar  were entrusted to CBI :

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8  

(1)     F.I.R. No.312 dated 4.6.2002 under Section  406/409/468/471/477A/120 I.P.C. and 13(1)  (c) (d) Prevention of Corruption Act, lodged  under Police Station, Sector 17, Chandigarh. (2)     Inquiry No.10 of 3.4.2001, Chandigarh, for  alleged misuse of official vehicles and mobile  phone by the petitioner, Sanjiv Kumar, leading  to registration of criminal case under Section  13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. (3)     Inquiry No.31 dated 10.8.2001, Chandigarh,  regarding appointment of 36 officials under  D.P.E.P. by the petitioner resulting in alleged  financial loss of Rs.22,33,466 to the State  Government.

(4)     Inquiry No.38 dated 20.9.2001, Chandigarh,  regarding financial irregularities committed by  the petitioner in the projects of various items  amounting to over Rs.56 lakhs.

(5)     Inquiry No.16 dated 3.9.2002, Chandigarh,  regarding disproportionate assets against the  petitioner.

On 28th June, 2004 the petitioner filed CCP No.448 of 2004  complaining of violation of the order dated 25.11.2003 passed  by this Court at the hands of the then Chief Minister and the  Chief Secretary of the State of Haryana.  It was submitted that  certain departmental inquiry proceedings were initiated against  the petitioner for the purpose of bringing pressure on him so  that there could be no free investigation.  Three departmental  inquiry proceedings against the petitioner were brought to the  notice of the Court which are as under :-

(i)     Chargesheet dated 11.2.2002 for willful absence  from duty.

(ii)    Chargesheet dated 23.7.2002 for committing  irregularities in making appointments while posted  as Project Director, Haryana Prathmik Shiksha  Pariyojana Parishad.

(iii)   Chargesheet dated 18.2.2003 for non-adjustment  of an advance of Rs.22,000/- taken by him from  the Government.

The petitioner insisted that the proceedings may be  entrusted to any authority other than the one under the State  Government.  He solicited an order of the Court for entrusting  the proceedings to be held by the Central Vigilance Commission  (for short the ’CVC’). The learned Solicitor General appeared for  the CBI and the CVC and stated that the CVC was agreeable to  have the proceedings entrusted to it so that they could be  expeditiously and fairly conducted. The Court directed the  abovesaid 3 departmental inquiry proceedings to be entrusted to  the CVC in terms of the following directions:-         "It is directed that the 3 inquiries  referred to hereinabove shall be entrusted to  the C.V.C. who shall take up the proceedings  from the stage at which they are.  Before  proceeding ahead, the C.V.C. shall examine if  the inquiries have been properly and regularly  held up to this stage.  In case he feels it  necessary to reopen the inquiries and hold  afresh he shall be at liberty to do so.  The

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 8  

proceedings may be conducted by the C.V.C.  himself or by a senior officer in his  establishment to whom he may wish to entrust  the inquiries."

       On 23.8.2004, during the course of hearing and  consequently in its order, the Court noted that there were in all  8 complaints pending with the State against the petitioner.  Of  these, 5 complaints were subject matter of inquiry/investigation  by the CBI, the details whereof are mentioned in the order of  this Court dated 25.11.2003 and there were 3 departmental  inquiry proceedings, the details whereof are mentioned in the  order of this Court dated 6.8.2004 and which had stood  transferred to CVC in terms of the orders of this Court.  There  were no other departmental inquiries or criminal complaints  pending against the petitioner.

       The Court directed the Status Report to be called for.

       On 22.9.2004 the petitioner, Sanjiv Kumar filed a writ  petition in the High Court of Delhi impleading (i) Union of India,  (ii) Department of Public Grievances, (iii) Director, CBI and (iv)  Chief Vigilance Commissioner, as respondents.  He  complained  of unfairness in the investigation and sought for the relief of the  investigating officer, Shri Harbhajan Ram, SP, CBI being  replaced by "a fresh team headed by officers of impeccable  integrity and character working under the supervision and  monitoring of the respondent no.4/CVC."  This petition on the  request of the parties was directed to be transferred to this  Court.  On 18.2.2005, Crl.M.P. No. 2322 of 2005 was filed in this  Court wherein the petitioner sought for orders of this Court  "constituting a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by a  retired IPS Officer who would co-opt other serving officers of  unimpeachable integrity under the supervision and monitoring of  this Court in order to investigate the issues involved in the  petition or in the alternative direct that a fresh team of Officers  from the CBI to be constituted to investigate this case."

       Status Reports of investigation have been filed from time  to time.  On 14.3.2005 we had taken up the matter in the  Chamber for the purpose of ascertaining the progress of the  cases under investigation with the CBI.  Shri U.S. Misra,  Director, CBI assisted by Ms. S. Sundari Nanda, DIG, CBI were  present with all the relevant records.  A summary of the  investigation details prepared by the Director, CBI for the  convenience of the Court was handed over which was directed to  be placed in a sealed cover.                  The learned ASG on 10th May, 2005 filed two charts of  Status of Cases with the CBI and with the CVC which are as  under : STATUS OF CASES WITH CBI, RELATING TO SHRI SANJIV  KUMAR, IAS (REF. Order dated 25.11.2003 passed in Writ Petition (Crl.)  No.93/2003)

SR.  NO. Inquiry/FIR No.State  Vigilance/UT Police

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 8  

Chandigarh CBI Case No. and  Date of Registration Present position 1. Writ Petition (Crl.) No.93  of 2003 in the matter of  Shri Sanjiv Kumar Vs.  State of Haryana & others.   Allegation relating to  appointment of JBT  Teachers by Haryana  Govt. in the year 2000. PE.I (A)/2003-ACU- IX dated 12.12.2003 P.E. converted into  RC.3(A)/2004 \026 ACU- IX on 24.5.2004. The  case is in the final  stage of investigation. I.O. : R.N. Azad,  Additional Supdt. Of  Police 2. FIR No.312 dated 4.6.2002  of PS Sector \026 17C,  Chandigarh relating to  alleged  irregularities/corruption in  printing of text books. R.C.2(A)/2004-ACU- IX dated 27.1.2004 In final stage of  investigation I.O. : Sh. R. Singh,  Dy.Supdt. of Police

3. Inquiry No.38 dated  20.9.2001 of State  Vigilance Bureau,  Haryana, relating to the  alleged irregularities  committed in purchase of  various items under DPEP. PE.2(A)/2004-ACU- IX dated 27.1.2004 On completion of the  Enquiry, the P.E. was  converted into  R.C.2(A)/2005-ACU- IX on 17.2.2005.  Case  is under investigation. I.O. : Sh. M.K. Bhat Additional Supdt. Of  Police 4. Enquiry No.16 dated  3.9.2002 Chandigarh,  relating to alleged  possession of  disproportionate assets PE.3(A)/2004-ACU-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8  

IX dated 27.1.2004 On completion of  Enquiry, the P.E. was  converted into  RC.3(A)/2005-ACU- IX on 17.2.2005.  Case  is under investigation. I.O. : Sh. M.K. Bhat,  Additional Supdt. Of  Police 5. FIR No.293/2003 dated  30.6.2003 PS Sector \026  17C,Chandigarh registered  on the basis of Inquiry  No.10 of 3.4.2001,  Chandigarh, relating to  alleged misuse of official  vehicle and mobile phone. R.C.1(A)/2004-ACU- IX dated 27.1.2004 Since no material  warranting prosecution  was revealed during  investigation, Closure  Report was filed on  21.8.2004 in the Court  of Special Judge for  CBI Cases, Chandigarh  and is pending for   acceptance self  contained Note,  containing the result of  investigation, sent to  Chief Secretary, Govt.  of Haryana on  20.8.2004, for such  action as deemed fit. 6. Inquiry No.31 dated  10.8.2001, Chandigarh,  relating to the alleged  irregularities committed in  the appointment of staff in  DPEP (District Primary  Education Project) PE.1(A)/2004-ACU- IX dated 27.1.2004 Enquiry completed and  SP’s Report  recommending RDA  for major penalty sent  on 7.10.2004 to Chief  Secretary, Govt. of  Haryana and Central  Vigilance Commission.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 8  

Status of cases entrusted with the CVC ANNEXURE Sl.  No. Charge  Sheet  dated Gist of Allegations Inquiry  Officer Present Status 1 11.02.02 Willful absence from duty.  It is alleged that Shri  Sanjeev Kumar on the  expiry of EL granted to him  from 22.05.2001 to  26.06.2001 did not join  duty and thus over stayed  his sanctioned leave &  absented himself from  27.06.2001 till the issuance  of C/S on 11.02.2002. Shri Y.P.  Rai, CDI,  CVC. Enquiry completed and  report sent to Chief  Secretary Haryana on  03.03.2005. 2 18.02.03 Non adjustment of advance  of Rs.22,000/-. It is alleged  that Shri S. Kumar was  sanctioned an amount of  Rs.22,000/- as TA for  performing his duty as an  Election Observer during  the month of April-May  2001.  Shri S.Kumar  however failed to adjust the  TA advance in  contravention of rule 3(1)  of All India Service  Conduct Rules 1968. Shri  Arvind  Kumar,  CDI, CVC. Enquiry completed &  Report submitted to  Chief Secretary,  Government of  Haryana on 21.03.2005. 3 23.07.02 Irregularities in making  appointments while posted  as Project Director,  Haryana Prathmik Shiksha  Pariyojna Parishad.  CBI  also submitted SP’s Report  in PE No.1(A)/2004 of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 8  

CBI/ACU-IX dated  27.01.2004 ------- In view of new facts  that emerged out of  CBI’s Report the CVC  has filed a  Miscellaneous Petition  in the Hon’ble Supreme  Court, as stated by Shri  P.Parmeswaran,  Government Advocate,  Supreme Court of  India, praying therein  to direct the Govt. of  Haryana to modify/alter  the charged framed  against Shri Sanjeev  Kumar vide C/S dated  23.07.2002.         We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in the  presence of the petitioner and the learned Additional Solicitor  General.  We have also perused the latest Status Report made  available by the CBI.   Having perused the Status Report as also  the information which was made available to the Court by the  Director and the DIG of CBI (reference: proceedings held on  14.3.2005), we are satisfied that the investigations into all the  matters entrusted to the CBI whether on complaint made by the  petitioner or on complaints made against him are proceeding  satisfactorily.  The petitioner had some grievance against Shri  Harbhajan Ram, the then investigating officer of CBI.   But it is  pointed out that the said investigating officer has suffered some  injury and the investigation has already been transferred and  entrusted to some other officer.  The Status Report and the  information given by the officers of the CBI is to the effect that  all the investigations related to this case are being handled with  the requisite care and caution and inasmuch as the investigation  is being held under the directions of this Court, an Officer of DIG  rank is continuously monitoring the progress of the investigation  conducted by different investigating officers and the Director of   CBI is being apprised of the progress from time to time.  This  takes care of the grievance, if any, of the petitioner which was  against the then investigating officer, Harbhajan Ram.  Ex  abudanti cautela we  clarify that the present investigating officer  who has replaced Shri Harbhajan Ram would review the  investigation done by his predecessor and would conduct further  investigation or carry out re-investigation if he feels the need for  doing so after apprising his superior officers or if directed to do  so by them.   

       We do not think the present case calls for a Special  Investigation Team (SIT) being constituted and the investigation  being taken away from the CBI and entrusted to any Special  Investigation Team.

       It may also be noted that political scenario in the State of  Haryana has undergone a drastic change.  During the pendency  of these proceedings, elections have taken place in the State of  Haryana.  The then Chief Minister, against whom the petitioner  had grievance has been voted out of power and a new Chief  Minister and a new Government have come in power.   

       On considering the totality of the facts and circumstances  of the cases, Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 448/2004, Criminal

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 8  

M.P. Nos. 2322/2005, 13518/2004 in W.P.(Crl.) No.93/2003 and  Transfer Case (Crl.) No. 7/2004 are disposed of in terms of the  following directions :- (1)     The Departmental Inquiry proceedings against the  petitioner shall be concluded by the CVC and proceeded to  their logical end in accordance with law. (2)     In the matter of Department Inquiry relating to  irregularities in making appointments while posted as  Project Director, Haryana Prathmik Shiksha Pariyojana  Parishad. (PE No.1(A)/2004 dated 27.1.2004), the CVC  has sought for a direction to the Government of Haryana  to modify or alter the charges framed against the  petitioner, Sanjiv Kumar.  The State Government shall be  free to take decision on the communication received from  the CVC in the matter of modification/alteration of the  charges. (3)     On 21.2.2005 this Court had directed that the petitioner  shall not be arrested and no proceedings against him shall  be filed by the CBI except by the leave of the court.  That  order stands vacated.  However, the petitioner shall not be  arrested or called for interrogation except after apprising  the Director, CBI.  No harassment shall be caused to the  petitioner and any action taken against the petitioner shall  be promptly brought to the notice of the competent Court  having jurisdiction over the case. (4)     We are not inclined to take cognizance and initiate any  contempt proceedings on the petition filed by the  petitioner in that regard.