Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court emphasized on the importance of Natural Justice. The Court expunged the remarks which were made in a judgment by the trial court in which the petitioner was a supervising officer for a period but not for the entirety of the investigation.
The petitioner had filed the petition against the order of the Special Judge, CBI to the Director, CBI to take disciplinary action against erring CBI officials responsible for improper investigation and supervision, specifically naming the petitioner.
The Court held that the remarks and order were completely unnecessary as no person should be condemned unheard. Moreover, the passing of such remarks were bad in law when there is an option of prosecution under Section 211 of the Penal Code, 1860 available. The Court also observed that the investigation was under the supervision of the petitioner for a period and not for it’s entirety, hence, putting the blame on the petitioner was baseless when the remarks were not substantiated by mentioning the specific points in the investigation where the errors were made. The appeal was accordingly, allowed and disposed of. [Anil Kumar v. CBI, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 9792, decided on 10.08.2017]
