In a sharp reminder that accountability extends to every corner of the justice system, the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to quash directions for filing an FIR against two Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) officers. The Court stressed that serious allegations against officials cannot be brushed aside, even if they belong to the premier investigating agency.
Background
The case has its roots in two writ petitions filed more than two decades ago. In 2001, Sheesh Ram Saini and Vijay Aggarwal approached the Delhi High Court, accusing CBI officers Vinod Kumar Pandey (then Inspector) and Neeraj Kumar (then Joint Director) of misconduct. Their complaints included allegations of wrongful confinement, abuse, threats, and tampering of official records.
In 2006, a single judge of the Delhi High Court directed the Delhi Police to register FIRs against the officers, observing that the complaints disclosed cognizable offences. When the officers challenged the ruling, their Letters Patent Appeals were dismissed in 2019. They then turned to the Supreme Court.
Hearing the appeals, a bench led by Justice Pankaj Mithal examined whether the High Court was justified in directing an FIR. The officers’ counsel argued that no cognizable offence was made out, and further stressed that the High Court had overstepped its powers by discarding the CBI’s internal inquiry report, which had found no substance in the allegations.
Rejecting these submissions, the bench remarked: “It is high time that sometimes those who investigate must also be investigated, to keep alive the faith of the public in the system.”
Read also:- President Confirms Six Additional Judges as Permanent Judges of Bombay High Court
The Court highlighted several troubling aspects: documents seized by CBI officers in 2000 were not accompanied by a proper seizure memo, and one complainant alleged he was summoned despite a bail order protecting him. Claims of intimidation and use of abusive language were also noted as serious enough to merit investigation.
At the same time, the Supreme Court clarified that the High Court’s conclusions were only prima facie opinions. The investigating officer would be free to assess the evidence independently and decide whether to file a chargesheet or a closure report.
Decision
Upholding the High Court’s 2006 order, the Supreme Court directed the Delhi Police to proceed with registering FIRs against the two officers. However, it modified one aspect: the investigation will not be handled by the Special Cell (usually tasked with terrorism cases) but by a senior Delhi Police officer, not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner.
Read also:- Allahabad High Court Restrains Police from Arresting SRM University Officials in FIR on Law Courses
The Court also extended protection to the officers, stating that if they cooperate with the probe, no coercive action such as arrest should be taken unless custodial interrogation becomes necessary. Importantly, the bench directed that the investigation must be completed within three months.
The order closed with a stern reminder: “Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done.”
Case: Vinod Kumar Pandey & Anr. vs. Seesh Ram Saini & Ors. (with connected matters)
Date of Judgment: 10 September 2025
