Uttarakhand High Court

BA1/912/2025 on 6 June, 2025

Author: Rakesh Thapliyal

Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal

             Office Notes, reports,
             orders or proceedings
SL.
      Date     or directions and                            COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             Registrar's order with
                  Signatures




                                      BA1 No. 912 of 2025


                                      Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.

2. Mr. Amit Bhatt, learned Government Advocate for the State.

3. Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for CBI.

4. Yesterday the matter was heard at length and for proper assistance learned counsel for the CBI Mr. Piyush Garg was also called in order to assist to examine what procedure are being followed by the CBI in the matter relating to the corruption and for this purpose the Deputy S.P. of the CBI yesterday joined the proceeding through V.C. and submits that after examining the genuineness of the complaint of the complainant the next step is to register the FIR and then trap. In this regard, he has given reference of certain circulars.

5. Mr. Piyush Garg in order to assist the court being the counsel for the CBI shown circular relating to the corruption cases and submits that examining the genuineness of complainant and his complaint the CBI first register the FIR then proceed with the investigation by laying trap.

6. On the other side, Mr. Amit Bhatt, learned Government Advocate submits that in Vigilance Establishment there is a different procedure i.e. after examining the complaint the first step is laying trap then register the FIR.

7. The submissions as advanced by the learned counsel for the CBI and for the State are very surprising since both the agencies are adapting different procedure relating to the matter under the same Act i.e. P.C. Act.

8. The question is whether without registration of the FIR lay down the trap is a correct procedure as adopted by the Vigilance Establishment. Though any proceeding on or before the registration of the FIR is nothing but can be termed as a preliminary enquiry and if the argument of Mr. Amit Bhatt is accepted then the trap before the registration of the FIR is nothing but like a preliminary enquiry.

9. On deciding this issue, let this matter be listed on 18.06.2025 on top of board.

10. On that day Mr. Amit Bhatt advance his submissions since in this case the trap was prior to the registration of the FIR then whether such a trap is the part of preliminary enquiry or the part of investigation, though in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lalita Kumari the investigation starts only after registration of the FIR.

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 06.06.2025 PR