Page 1

      REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) NO.401 OF 2013

Subrata Chattoraj …Appellant

Versus

Union of India & Ors. …Respondents

WITH

WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) NO.402  OF 2013

AND

T.P. (C) NO.445 OF 2014

AND

WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) NO.413 OF 2013

Alok Jena …Appellant

Versus

Union of India & Ors. …Respondents

WITH

WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) NO.324 OF 2014

1

Page 2

J U D G M E N T

T.S. THAKUR, J.

1. Writ Petitions seeking transfer of investigation from the  

State Agencies to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)  

under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, is by no  

means uncommon in the High Courts in this country.  Some,  

if not most of such cases in due course travel to this Court  

also, where, issues touching the powers of the High Courts  

and at times the power of this Court to direct such transfers  

are  raised  by  the  parties.  The  jurisdictional  aspect  is,  

however,  no  longer  res  integra,  the  same  having  been  

answered  authoritatively  by  a  Constitution  Bench  of  this  

Court in State of West Bengal & Ors. v.  Committee for   

Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal & Ors.   

(2010) 3 SCC 571. This Court in that case was examining  

whether  the  federal  structure  and  the  principles  of  

separation of powers, made it impermissible for the superior  

courts  to  direct  transfer  of  investigation  from  the  State  

Police to the CBI. Rejecting the contention, this Court held  

2

Page 3

that power of judicial review itself being a basic feature of  

the Constitution, the writ courts could issue appropriate writ,  

directions and orders to protect the fundamental  rights of  

the citizens.  This Court observed:

“51. The Constitution of India expressly confers the   power of judicial review on this Court and the High   Courts under Articles 32 and 226 respectively. Dr.   B.R. Ambedkar described Article 32 as the very soul   of the Constitution—the very heart  of it—the most   important article. By now, it is well settled that the  power  of  judicial  review,  vested  in  the  Supreme  Court and the High Courts under the said articles of   the  Constitution,  is  an  integral  part  and  essential   feature  of  the Constitution,  constituting part  of  its   basic structure. Therefore, ordinarily, the power of   the  High  Court  and  this  Court  to  test  the  constitutional  validity  of  legislations  can  never  be   ousted or even abridged. Moreover, Article 13 of the   Constitution  not  only  declares  the  pre-Constitution   laws  as  void  to  the  extent  to  which  they  are  inconsistent  with  the  fundamental  rights,  it  also   prohibits the State from making a law which either   takes  away  totally  or  abrogates  in  part  a  fundamental right. Therefore, judicial review of laws   is embedded in the Constitution by virtue of Article   13 read with Articles 32 and 226 of our Constitution.

52. It is manifest from the language of Article 245 of   the  Constitution  that  all  legislative  powers  of   Parliament  or  the  State  Legislatures  are  expressly   made subject to other provisions of the Constitution,   which obviously would include the rights conferred in   Part  III  of  the  Constitution.  Whether  there  is  a   contravention of any of the rights so conferred, is to   be decided only by the constitutional courts, which   are  empowered  not  only  to  declare  a  law  as   unconstitutional  but  also  to  enforce  fundamental   rights by issuing directions or orders or writs of or   “in  the  nature  of”  mandamus,  certiorari,  habeas   

3

Page 4

corpus,  prohibition  and  quo  warranto  for  this   purpose.

53. It  is  pertinent  to  note  that  Article  32  of  the   Constitution  is  also  contained  in  Part  III  of  the   Constitution,  which  enumerates  the  fundamental   rights  and  not  alongside  other  articles  of  the   Constitution which define the general jurisdiction of   the Supreme Court. Thus, being a fundamental right   itself, it is the duty of this Court to ensure that no   fundamental right is contravened or abridged by any   statutory or constitutional provision. Moreover, it is   also  plain  from the  expression  “in  the  nature  of”   employed in clause (2) of Article 32 that the power   conferred by the said clause is in the widest terms   and is not confined to issuing the high prerogative   writs specified in the said clause but includes within   its ambit the power to issue any directions or orders   or writs which may be appropriate for enforcement   of the fundamental rights. Therefore, even when the  conditions  for  issue  of  any  of  these  writs  are  not   fulfilled, this Court would not be constrained to fold   its hands in despair and plead its inability to help the   citizen who has come before it for judicial redress   (per P.N. Bhagwati, J. in  Bandhua Mukti Morcha v.  

Union of India (1984) 3 SCC 161).”

2. This Court summed up the conclusions in the following  

words:

“68. Thus, having examined the rival contentions in   the  context  of  the  Constitutional  Scheme,  we  conclude as follows:

(i) The fundamental rights, enshrined in Part III of   the  Constitution,  are  inherent  and  cannot  be  extinguished  by  any  Constitutional  or  Statutory   provision. Any law that abrogates or abridges such  rights  would  be  violative  of  the  basic  structure   doctrine. The actual effect and impact of the law on  the rights guaranteed under Part III has to be taken   into  account  in  determining  whether  or  not  it   destroys the basic structure.

4

Page 5

(ii)  Article  21 of  the  Constitution  in  its  broad  perspective  seeks  to  protect  the  persons  of  their   lives and personal liberties except according to the   procedure established by law. The said Article in its   broad  application  not  only  takes  within  its  fold   enforcement of the rights of an accused but also the   rights of the victim. The State has a duty to enforce   the human rights of a citizen providing for fair and   impartial investigation against any person accused of   commission  of  a  cognizable  offence,  which  may   include its own officers. In certain situations even a  witness  to  the  crime  may  seek  for  and  shall  be  granted protection by the State.

(iii)  In  view of  the  constitutional  scheme and the   jurisdiction conferred on this Court under Article  32  and  on  the  High  Courts  under  Article  226 of  the  Constitution  the  power  of  judicial  review being an  integral  part  of  the  basic  structure  of  the  Constitution,  no  Act  of  Parliament  can  exclude  or   curtail the powers of the Constitutional Courts with   regard to the enforcement of fundamental rights. As   a matter of fact, such a power is essential to give   practicable  content  to  the  objectives  of  the   Constitution embodied in Part III and other parts of   the Constitution. Moreover, in a federal constitution,   the  distribution  of  legislative  powers  between  the  Parliament  and  the  State  Legislature  involves   limitation on legislative powers and, therefore, this   requires an authority other than the Parliament to   ascertain whether such limitations are transgressed.   Judicial review acts as the final arbiter not only to   give effect  to the distribution of legislative powers   between the Parliament and the State Legislatures,   it  is  also  necessary  to  show any  transgression  by   each entity. Therefore, to borrow the words of Lord   Steyn, judicial review is justified by combination of   "the principles of separation of powers, rule of law,   the  principle  of  constitutionality  and  the  reach  of   judicial review".

(iv)  If  the  federal  structure  is  violated  by  any   legislative  action,  the  Constitution  takes  care  to   protect the federal structure by ensuring that Courts   act as guardians and interpreters of the Constitution   and  provide  remedy  under  Articles  32 and  226,  

5

Page 8

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.”

  (emphasis supplied)

4. We may at this stage refer to a few cases in which this  

Court has either directed transfer of investigation to the CBI  

or upheld orders passed by the High Court directing such  

transfer.

5. In  Inder Singh v. State of Punjab (1994) 6 SCC   

275 this  Court  was  dealing  with  a  case  in  which  seven  

persons aged between 14 to 85 were alleged to have been  

abducted by a senior police  officer  of  the rank of Deputy  

Superintendent of Police in complicity with other policemen.  

Since those abducted were not heard of for a considerable  

period, a complaint was made against their abduction and  

disappearance before the Director General of Police of the  

State.  It was alleged that the complaint was not brought to  

the notice of the Director General of Police (Crime). Instead  

8

Page 9

his  P.A.  had  marked  the  same  to  the  I.G.  (Crime)  

culminating  in  an  independent  inquiry  through  the  

Superintendent  of  Police,  Special  Staff,  attached  to  his  

office.  The  report  of  the  Superintendent  of  Police  

recommended  registration  of  a  case  against  the  officials  

concerned under Section 364 of the IPC. Despite the said  

recommendation no case was registered on one pretext or  

the other against the concerned police officer till 23rd March,  

1994.   It  was at  this  stage that a writ  petition was filed  

before this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India  

for a fair, independent and effective investigation into the  

episode.  Allowing  the  petition  this  Court  directed  an  

independent investigation to be conducted by the CBI into  

the circumstances of the abduction of seven persons; their  

present  whereabouts  or  the  circumstances  of  their  

liquidation. An inquiry was also directed into the delay on  

the part of  the State Police in taking action between 25th  

January 1992 when the complaint was first lodged and 23rd  

March, 1994 when the case was finally registered.   

9

Page 10

6. In  R.S. Sodhi Advocate v. State of U.P. and Ors.   

1994 (Supp) (1) SCC 143 this Court was dealing with a  

petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking  

an  independent  investigation  by  the  CBI  into  a  police  

encounter  resulting  in  the  killing  of  ten  persons.  The  

investigation into the incident was being conducted at the  

relevant point of time by an officer of the rank of Inspector  

General level. The State Government also appointed a one-

member  Commission  headed  by  a  sitting  Judge  of  the  

Allahabad High Court to inquire into the matter. This Court  

found that since the local police was involved in the alleged  

encounter an independent investigation by the CBI into what  

was  according  to  the  petitioner  a  fake  encounter,  was  

perfectly justified. This Court held that, however, faithfully  

the police may carry out the investigation, the same will lack  

‘credibility’  since the allegations against them are serious.  

Such a transfer was considered necessary so that all those  

concerned  including  the  relatives  of  the  deceased  feel  

assured that  an independent agency was looking into the  

matter  thereby  lending  credibility  to  the  outcome  of  the  

investigation.  This Court observed:

10

Page 11

“We have perused the events that have taken  place since the incidents but we are refraining from   entering  upon  the  details  thereof  lest  it  may  prejudice  any  party  but  we  think  that  since  the   accusations  are  directed  against  the  local  police  personnel  it  would  be  desirable  to  entrust  the   investigation  to  an  independent  agency  like  the   Central Bureau of Investigation so that all concerned   including  the  relatives  of  the  deceased  may  feel   assured that an independent agency is looking into   the matter and that would lend the final outcome of   the  investigation  credibility.  However  faithfully  the  local  police  may  carry  out  the  investigation,  the   same will  lack  credibility  since  the  allegations  are   against them. It is only with that in mind that we  having  thought  it  both     advisable  and  desirable  as    well  as  in  the  interest  of  justice  to  entrust  the  investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation   forthwith and we do hope that it would complete the   investigation at an early date so that those involved   in the occurrences, one way or the other, may be   brought  to  book. We  direct  accordingly.  In  so  ordering we mean no reflection on the credibility of   either the local police or the State Government but   we have been guided by the larger requirements of   justice.  The  writ  petition  and  the  review  petition   stand disposed of by this order.”

(emphasis supplied)

7. A reference may also be made to State of Punjab v.   

CBI (2011) 9 SCC 182 where the High Court of Punjab and  

Haryana transferred an investigation from the State Police to  

the  CBI  in  relation  to  what  was  known  as  “Moga  Sex  

Scandal” case. The High Court had while ordering transfer of  

the investigation found that several police officials, political  

11

Page 12

leaders, advocates, municipal counsellors, besides a number  

of persons belonging to the general public had been named  

in  connection  with  the  case.  The  High  Court  had  while  

commending  the  investigation  conducted  by  DIG  and  his  

team of officials all the same directed transfer of case to CBI  

having regard to the nature of the case and those allegedly  

involved  in  the  same.  The  directions  issued  by  the  High  

Court were affirmed by this Court and the matter allowed to  

be investigated by the CBI.   

8. More recently, this Court in  Advocates Association,  

Bangalore, v. Union of India and Ors. (2013) 10 SCC  

611 had an occasion to deal with the question of transfer of  

an  investigation  from the  State  Police  to  the  CBI  in  the  

context of an ugly incident involving advocates, police and  

media  persons  within  the  Bangalore  City  Civil  Court  

Complex. On a complaint filed by the Advocates’ Association,  

Bangalore,  before  the  Chief  Minister  for  suitable  action  

against  the  alleged  police  atrocities  committed  on  the  

advocates,  the  Government  of  Karnataka  appointed  the  

Director General of Police, CID, Special Unit and Economic  

12

Page 13

Offences as an Inquiry Officer to conduct an in-house inquiry  

into  the  matter.  The  Advocates’  Association  at  the  same  

time  filed  a  complaint  with  jurisdictional  police  station,  

naming the policemen involved in the incident.  In addition,  

the Registrar, City Civil Court also lodged a complaint with  

the police for causing damage to the property of City Civil  

Court, Bangalore by those indulged in violence. Several writ  

petitions were then filed before the High Court,  inter alia,  

asking  for  investigation  by  the  CBI.  The  High  Court  

constituted a Special  Investigation Team (SIT)  headed by  

Dr. R.K. Raghvan, a retired Director CBI, as its Chairman  

and  others.  The  Advocates’  Association  was,  however,  

dissatisfied with that order which was assailed before this  

Court primarily on the ground that a fair investigation could  

be conducted only by an independent agency like the CBI.  

Relying upon the decision of this Court in  State of West  

Bengal  v.  Committee  for  Protection  of  Democratic   

Rights (2010) 2 SCC 571 this Court directed transfer of  

investigation  to  the  CBI  holding  that  the  nature  of  the  

incident and the delay in setting up of the SIT was sufficient  

to warrant such a transfer.   

13

Page 14

9. It is unnecessary to multiply decisions on the subject,  

for  this  Court  has  exercised  the  power  to  transfer  

investigation from the State Police to the CBI in cases where  

such transfer is considered necessary to discover the truth  

and to meet the ends of justice or because of the complexity  

of  the  issues  arising  for  examination  or  where  the  case  

involves  national  or  international  ramifications  or  where  

people  holding  high  positions  of  power  and  influence  or  

political clout are involved.  What is important is that while  

the power to transfer is exercised sparingly and with utmost  

care and circumspection this Court has more often than not  

directed  transfer  of  cases  where  the  fact  situations  so  

demand.

10. We  are  in  the  case  at  hand  dealing  with  a  major  

financial scam nicknamed ‘Chit Fund Scam’ affecting lakhs of  

depositors across several States in the Eastern parts of this  

country.  Affidavits  and  status  reports  filed  in  these  

proceedings reveal that several companies were engaged in  

the business of receiving deposits from the public at large.  

The modus operandi of the companies involved in such Ponzi  

14

Page 15

Schemes was in no way different from the ordinary except  

that they appear to have evolved newer and more ingenious  

ways  of  tantalizing  gullible  public  to  make  deposits  and  

thereby  fall  prey  to  temptation  and the  designs  of  those  

promoting such companies.  For instance Saradha Group of  

Companies which is a major player in the field, had floated  

several schemes to allure the depositors to collect from the  

market a sizeable amount on the promise of the depositors  

getting  attractive  rewards  and  returns.  These  fraudulent  

(Ponzi)  schemes  included  land  allotment  schemes,  flat  

allotment  schemes,  and  tours  and  travel  schemes.  The  

group had floated as many as 160 companies although four  

out of them were the front runners in this sordid affair.  An  

interim  forensic  audit  report  submitted  to  the  SEBI  by  

Sarath & Associate, Chartered Accountants on 27th February,  

2014 sums up in  the  following words,  the  background in  

which the schemes are floated and the public defrauded :

“The  company M/s  Saradha Realty  India  Ltd.  was   involved in financial fraud involving in an attempt to   deliberately  mislead  the  general  public  by  announcing dubious money multiplier  schemes.  It   

15

Page 16

has also indulged in misleading the financial status   of the group companies by incorrect disclosures in   the  financial  statements  in  an  attempt  to  deceive  financial statement users and regulatory authorities.

The  investors  lured  to  extraordinary  returns  is   typically  attributed  to  something  that  sounds   impressive but is intentionally vague, such as hedge  fund in land,  resorts,  tours  and travel  plans,  high  yield investment programs.

Typical to the Ponzi schemes the investors who are   economically  very  poor  have  invested  relatively   small amounts such as Rs.100 and wait to see if the   promised  returns  are  paid.  After  one  month  the   investor received maturity amounts, so the investor   truly believes s/he has earned the promised return.   What the investor doesn’t realize is that the Rs.100   was  a  RETURN OF  THE  INVESTMENT AND NOT A  RETURN ON THE INVESTMENT. In other words, the  Rs.100  return  came  from  the  Rs.100  principal   initially invested or from a newly-recruited investor,   rather  than  from  any  profits  generated  by  the  investment opportunity. After a second month yields   another  Rs.100  payment,  the  investor  is  ‘hooked’   and  typically  will  invest  larger  amounts  in  the   scheme and will enthusiastically inform friends and  family  members  about  this  ‘fantastic’  investment   opportunity.

Since  these  early  investors  have  actually  received   the  promised  returns,  their  promotion  of  the   investment comes across as genuine and instills an   almost  irresistible  urge  in  friends  and  family   members to invest as well.

If pressed by skeptical investors for more detail, the   promoters  typically  evade  answering  the  question   and  instead  talk  about  how  recently-recruited   investors have been receiving the promised returns.

16

Page 17

Since  little,  of  the  victims’  funds  are  actually   invested into a legitimate profit-generating activity,   the scheme continued for only as long as the cash   inflows  to  existing  investors.   However,  as  the   number of investors grown rapidly, the pool of new  investors  unavoidably  shrinks.   At  one  point,  the   cash  flow  situation  collapsed  resulting  in  four   possible  outcomes:  (1)  the  investment  promoters   disappear, taking remaining investment money with   them; (2) the scheme collapsed of its own weight,   and  the  promoters  have  problems  paying  out  the   promised  returns  and,  as  the  word  spread,  more  people start asking for their money creating a run- on-the-bank situation; (3) the investment promoters   turn themselves in and confess.”      

11. The Report suggests that the investors were promised  

very high returns by way of interest rate ranging from 10%  

to 18%. The said returns promised to the depositors were,  

according to the Report,  too good to be true. The Report  

also suggests that a very large number of ‘agents base’ was  

created  by  the  companies  to  extend  the  reach  of  these  

companies. For Saradha Realty India Ltd. itself as many as  

2,21,000  agents  were  working,  who  were  paid  an  

unreasonably  high  brokerage  of  30%  of  the  instrument  

which became the driving force for the agents to go that  

extra  mile  to  collect  as  much  as  possible.  The  Report  

indicates that investments that matured for payment were  

17

Page 18

paid out of the cash collected from new members which was  

opposed  to  the  normal  business  norms  in  which  returns  

ought  to  be  paid  out  of  profits  earned  in  the  business.  

Besides, the cash collections were neither accurately shown  

in the books of accounts, nor did the bank accounts reveal  

the details of such cash collections. The Report states that  

the company had no real intention of doing any legitimate  

business activity and the money collected from the public  

was spread over 160 companies and spent away or siphoned  

off.  No major  revenue was seen to  be  generated  by any  

group company. The companies had opened too many bank  

accounts  for  Round  Tripping  Transactions  for  the  monies  

collected  by  them.  Apart  from as  many as  218 branches  

spread over several States including West Bengal, Odisha,  

Bihar, Assam and other States the companies had as many  

as 347 bank accounts in 15 banks in the name of the Group  

Companies.  The bank accounts were opened at the location  

of branches enabling deposit of the cash into accounts. The  

daily cash collected less expenses was deposited at branch  

account  and  the  money  pooled  and  transferred  to  other  

accounts as per CMD’s instructions and utilized to issue the  

18

Page 19

cheques.  The  Report  also  points  out  violation  of  the  

Securities  and  Exchange  Board  of  India  Act,  1992,  the  

Companies Act, 1956, The Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934  

and the Income-Tax Act, 1961. It also points out fraudulent  

certification,  non-compliance  of  accounting  standards,  

material mis-statement of facts and gross negligence on the  

part of the statutory Auditors. The Interim Report eventually  

draws up the following conclusions:    

“Saradha Reality  India  Ltd.  and  its  other  3  group  companies  has  collected  money  from  the  open  market,  reaching  out  to  the  general  public  by  employing  huge  number  of  agents,  in  form  of   Investment  under  different  Schemes  viz.,  Fixed  Deposits,  Monthly  Investment  Scheme,  Recurring  Deposits. The SRIL has in pretext of land developers,   construction  of  flats,  running  tours  and  travels,   travel  packages  and  resorts  collected  around  Rs.2,459 crores over a period of 5 years.

SRIL has no valid registration under the SEBI Act for   ‘collective  Investment  Scheme’  nor  has  licenced  under  RBI  Act  for  Nidhi/Chit  fund/NBFC.  Its  MOA  also does not permit the company to collect monies   in form of deposits.  SEBI had passed a winding up   order in view of the collection of monies under one   of the company’s schemes as Collective Investment   scheme on 23/4/2013.  

Company management, with fraudulent intent, has   designed  several  investment  schemes  wherein  the   depositors invested in expectation of high return.  It   has  also  misrepresented  its  business  in  writing  to   income Tax department, SEBI, and to its depositors.   

19

Page 20

The Depositors  are promised fixed interest  returns   but  management  has  promised  tours,  travel   packages, land purchases, flat advances etc. on the  receipts which in realty is not intended to be given to   the depositors.

The SRIL did not comply with the KYC norms while   collecting the deposits, all the deposits are identified   by  names  and  addresses,  but  the  ID  or  address   proves  are  not  obtained.   The  authenticity  of  the   investors is difficult to prove as the deposits are not   KYC complied.

The agents are main part of the entire operations of   the  company,  in  evolving  the  new  schemes,   explaining the public and collecting the deposits. The   agents  are  operated  as  a  tree  (chain)  and  each   agent  in  the  chain  will  get  commission  on  each   deposit.  These commissions are paid in priority from  the  business  cash  collected  (almost  30%  of   collections)  and  the  balance  money  is  used  for   meeting  company expenses  and  the  rest  is  either   deposited at the bank in the location of the branch   or sent to Head Office.  The cheques collected are   directly  deposited  in  the  Bank.   Other  than   Commission the agents are awarded field allowance,   prizes,  and  performance  bonuses  forming  around  30% of the total deposits collected.

SRIL  has  expanded  rapidly  its’  the  business,   takeovers in a very short span of five years.  The   Company has never utilised money so collected from  investors for carrying out any legitimate business to   earn returns to payback the investors. It has utilized   the  monies  so  collected  in  these  takeovers,  and  venturing  into  new  company  for  running  the  loss   making  businesses  like  media  Channels,   newspapers, Magazines, manufacturing automobiles.   The group has incorporated 160 companies and the   share capital monies, furniture & fixtures, plant and  machines, huge staff salaries, fleet of cars on rent,   buses, 320 branch premises’ rents, daily expenses,   

20

Page 21

maintenance  are  all  met  through  the  deposits   collected from the investors.

One  of  the  company  –  Saradha  Exports’  ha  announced  as  it  is  expanding  to  international  by  exporting business and opening a branch at Madrid,   SPAIN, on its website.

Al  the  group  companies  are  debt-free  companies;   the loans standing in the Financial Statements are   partly of investors, other group company loans and   advances.  The  Audited  Financial  Statements  are   misrepresenting  the  facts  and Statutory  Auditor  is   grossly negligent in discharging his duty to present   the true and fair view of the state of affairs of the   companies.  Most of the group company’s Auditor is   common.

Since  the  deposits  collected  are  not  utilized  for   generating income, the monies are spent off and the   Company soon has failed to return back the monies   to depositors on their maturity. Cash rotation cycle   of the depositors broke and has severe cash crunch  and let the company to fall off.”

12. The  Report  estimates  the  collection  made  by  the  

Saradha Group of companies at Rs.2459 crores.  

13. Failure of the group companies to refund the deposits  

made with them was bound to as it  indeed has led to a  

public  outcry  against  the  scam  on  account  of  the  huge  

amount  that  was  collected  by  these  companies  by  

21

Page 22

defrauding  a  very  large  section  of  the  public  majority  of  

whom appear to be from middle class, lower middle class or  

poorer  sections  of  the  society.  The  Government  of  West  

Bengal  acted  in  response  to  the  protests  and  the  public  

anguish over a fraud of such colossal magnitude and set up  

a  Commission  of  Inquiry  headed  by  Mr.  Justice  Shyamal  

Kumar Sen, retired Chief Justice, Allahabad High Court with  

four others to be nominated by the Government to inquire  

into the matters set out in a notification dated 24th April,  

2013 issued in that regard. The Commission was empowered  

to receive all individual and public complaints regarding the  

Saradha Group of Companies and other similar companies  

involved in the scam and to forward such complaints to the  

authorities  concerned  including  the  Special  Investigation  

Team for launching prosecution. The Commission was also  

authorized  to  send  directives  to  the  Special  Investigation  

Team, identify the key persons responsible for the present  

situation, quantify the estimated amount of money involved  

in the alleged transactions, assess the assets and liabilities  

of  the  group  of  companies  and  to  recommend  ways  and  

means  for  providing  succor  to  those  who  had  lost  their  

22

Page 23

savings. The Commission was also authorized to recommend  

remedial action and measures to the State Government so  

that such situations do not recur.   

14. By  another  notification  dated  27th August,  2013  the  

Government, relying upon the directions issued by the High  

Court of Calcutta in Writ Petition No.12163(W) of 2013 and  

Writ  Petition  No.12197(W)  of  2013  empowered  the  

Commission of Inquiry to dispose of all the assets belonging  

to  the  Saradha  Group  of  Companies  and/or  their  agents  

and/or their Benamidars and to adopt an appropriate mode  

of recovery of debts on behalf of the Saradha Group from its  

debtors and add the proceeds to the fund to be created for  

that  purpose.  The  Commission  was  also  clothed  with  the  

power to attach the bank accounts belonging to the Saradha  

Group of Companies and the personal bank accounts of the  

Directors apart from restraining the banks concerned from  

allowing anyone to operate such accounts unless authorized  

by the Commission. Pursuant to the above notifications the  

Commission  has  received  nearly  18  lakhs  complaints  and  

23

Page 24

claim petitions demanding refund of the amount deposited  

under such Ponzi Schemes.  

15. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the State of  

Bihar it is, inter alia, stated that the State Government has  

announced a sum of rupees 500 crores for payment to the  

aggrieved depositors apart from money that may be raised  

from selling off  the assets of the companies including the  

Saradha Group of Companies.  The affidavit further states  

that  the  Commission  has  passed  orders  for  payment  of  

compensation  to  the  investors  in  the  Saradha  Group  of  

Companies and that over one lakh beneficiaries have been  

paid  while  another  1,66,456  identified  for  such  payment.  

The affidavit also states that as per the directions issued by  

the  High  Court  of  Calcutta  in  terms  of  the  notification  

mentioned above as many as 224 immovable properties and  

54 vehicles have been identified for attachment and possible  

sale and recovery of the amount due from the companies.  

The affidavit goes on to say that one Kunal Kumar Ghosh,  

Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabha, was arrested on 23rd  

November, 2013 in connection with the case registered in  

24

Page 25

Bidhannagar South Police Station after being interrogated on  

several  occasions.  The  said  Kunal  Kumar  Ghosh  was  the  

media CEO of Saradha Group of Companies.  In addition one  

Srinjoy Bose, Member of Parliament was also interrogated  

by  serious  Fraud  Investigation  Office  in  relation  to  the  

Saradha  Group  of  Companies  and  that  the  Special  

Investigating Team and the police authorities are extending  

full  support  and  cooperation  to  the  Central  Agencies  like  

Enforcement Directorate, Serious Fraud Investigation Office  

etc. for effective investigation of the scam.  The State has in  

that view opposed the prayer of the petitioner for transfer of  

the investigation from the State Police to the CBI.

16. When this case came up before us on 4th March, 2013  

our attention was drawn by Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan, Senior  

counsel  appearing  for  the  State  of  West  Bengal  to  a  

statement appearing at page 474 of the said sur-rejoinder  

filed by the State which according to the learned counsel  

summarized the investments made by the Saradha group of  

companies from out of the money collected by it from the  

depositors.  These details were sketchy and unsatisfactory  

25

Page 26

especially  when  the  trail  of  money  collected  remained  

obscure no matter it was one of the important, if  not the  

single  most  important,  angle  to  be  investigated  for  

unraveling facts leading to the scam and identifying those  

who had aided and/or abetted the same. Mr. Vaidhyanathan  

was,  therefore,  granted  ten  days  time  to  file  a  

comprehensive statement as to the amount collected by the  

said  group  of  companies  and  the  expenditure  

incurred/investments made over a period of time.   

17. An affidavit was accordingly filed by the State of West  

Bengal in which the purchase value of the property acquired  

by  Saradha  Group  of  Companies  was  estimated  at  Rs.40  

crores only as against a total collection of Rs.2,460 crores  

made by the said companies.  Mr. Vaidyanathan argued that  

the investment in real estate could go upto Rs.110 crores on  

the basis of the information gathered from the software that  

was seized from the companies concerned. Even if that were  

so  a  significant  discrepancy  existed  between  investigation  

based estimated purchase value of the properties on the one  

hand and what could according to Mr. Vaidyanathan emerge  

26

Page 27

from  the  software  seized  from  the  companies.  Mr.  

Vaidyanathan  argued  that  the  discrepancy  could  be  on  

account  of  the  fact  that  a  large  number  of  properties  

referred  to  in  the  affidavit  have  been  acquired  by  the  

companies on the basis of power of attorneys which do not  

indicate the value of  the property covered by such deeds  

and transactions. Be that as it may, a huge gap between the  

amount collected and the investments made in real estate  

itself calls for effective investigation as to the trail of money  

collected by the group of companies.  Investigation by the  

State  Police  has  not  unfortunately  made  any  significant  

headway in this regard.  

18. More importantly, the question whether the scam was  

confined  only  to  those  who  actively  managed  and  

participated  in  the  affairs  of  the  companies  or  the  same  

flourished on account of the support and patronage of others  

is an issue that has bothered us all through the hearing of  

this case.  We had, therefore, directed the State to file a  

sample  copy  of  the  chargesheets  said  to  have  been  

submitted before the jurisdictional Courts. A perusal of the  

27

Page 28

copies  so  furnished  shows  that  the  same  relate  only  to  

individual deposits leaving untouched the larger conspiracy  

angle  that  needs  to  be  addressed.  It  was  argued by Mr.  

Bhattacharya that the Investigating Agency was deliberately  

avoiding to investigate that vital aspect. Mr. Vaidyanathan,  

however,  contended that  the  larger  conspiracy  angle  was  

being  investigated  separately  in  an  FIR  registered  with  

Vidhannagar Police Station. He sought and was given time to  

file an affidavit setting out the particulars of the FIR in which  

the  larger  conspiracy  angle  was  being  examined  and  the  

progress so far made in that regard.   

19. An  additional  affidavit  was  accordingly  filed  by  Mr.  

Vaidyanathan in which it is, inter alia, stated that the larger  

conspiracy  angle  is  being  investigated  in  Crime  No.102  

registered in Bidhannagar Police Station (North) on 6th May,  

2013  under  Sections  406,  409,  420,  120B  IPC.  At  the  

hearing  of  the  case  on  9th April,  2014  Mr.  Vaidyanathan  

passed on to us a sealed cover containing a list of persons  

who according to the learned counsel need to be questioned  

in view of the disclosers made and the evidence collected so  

28

Page 29

far  by  the  Investigating  Agency.  The  basis  on  which  the  

Investigation Team has named the persons in the list was  

not  set  out  in  the  list  or  elsewhere.  Mr.  Vaidyanathan,  

therefore, offered to file a synopsis of the evidence on the  

basis  whereof  the  names  mentioned  in  the  list  had been  

included in the said list and the evidence which incriminates  

them  calling  for  further  investigation  into  their  role  and  

conduct.  An affidavit giving the synopsis was pursuant to  

the said order filed by Mr.  Vaidyanathan indicating briefly  

the  basis  on  which  the  persons  named  in  the  list  were  

sought to be interrogated in connection with the scam. A  

perusal of the synopsis furnished and the names included in  

the  list  makes  it  abundantly  clear  to  us  that  several  

important individuals wielding considerable influence within  

the system at the State and the national level  have been  

identified by the Investigating Agency for interrogation.  We  

do  not  consider  it  necessary  to  reveal  at  this  stage  the  

names of the individuals who are included in the list on the  

basis  of  which  the  Investigating  Agency  proposes  to  

interrogate them or the material so far collected to justify  

such  interrogation.  All  that  we  need  point  out  is  that  

29

Page 30

investigation into the scam is not confined to those directly  

involved  in  the  affairs  of  companies  but  may  extend  to  

several others who need to be questioned about their role in  

the  sequence  and  unfolding  of  events  that  has  caused  

ripples on several fronts.             

20. There is yet another aspect to which we must advert at  

this  stage.  This  relates  to  the  role  of  the  Regulatory  

Authorities.  Investigation conducted so far puts a question  

mark  on  the  role  of  regulatory  authorities  like  SEBI,  

Registrar of Companies and officials of the RBI within whose  

respective jurisdictions and areas of operation the scam not  

only took birth but flourished unhindered.  The synopsis filed  

by Mr. Vaidyanathan names some of the officials belonging  

to these authorities and give reasons why their role needs to  

be  investigated.  The  synopsis  goes  to  the  extent  of  

suggesting that regular payments towards bribe were paid  

through middleman to some of those who were supposed to  

keep an eye on such ponzi companies. The  Regulatory  

Authorities, it is common ground, exercise their powers and  

jurisdiction under Central legislations.  Possible connivance  

30

Page 31

of those who were charged with the duty of preventing the  

scams of such nature in breach of the law, therefore, needs  

to  be  closely  examined  and  effectively  dealt  with.  

Investigation  into  the  larger  conspiracy  angle  will,  thus,  

inevitably  bring  such  statutory  regulators  also  under  

scrutiny.   

21. It  was  at  one  stage  argued  on  behalf  of  SEBI  that  

companies  involved  in  the  scam  were  doing  chit-fund  

business and since chit-funds were not within its jurisdiction  

it  could  not  have  taken  cognizance  of  the  same.  Our  

attention was, however, drawn to atleast two orders passed  

by SEBI  directing  winding up of  such ponzi  schemes and  

refund of the amounts received by the companies concerned  

to the depositors.  It was submitted by learned Counsel for  

the  petitioner  that  the  SEBI  having  examined  the  issue,  

taken cognizance of the violation, no matter belatedly and  

issued directions for winding up of the schemes and refund  

of the amount, it was no longer open to it to argue that it  

had no role to play in the matter.   

31

Page 32

22. We  are  not  in  these  proceedings  required  to  

authoritatively pronounce upon the question whether SEBI  

had the jurisdiction to act in the matter.  What is important  

is that if upon investigation it is found that SEBI did have  

the jurisdiction to act in the matter but failed to do so then  

such failure  may  tantamount to connivance and call  for  

action  against  those  who  failed  to  act  diligently  in  the  

matter.  Suffice it to say, that the scam of this magnitude  

going on for years unnoticed and unchecked, is suggestive  

of a deep rooted apathy if not criminal neglect on the part of  

the  regulators  who  ought  to  do  everything  necessary  to  

prevent  such  fraud  and  public  loot.   Depending  upon  

whether  the  investigation  reveals  any  criminal  conspiracy  

among those promoting the companies that flourished at the  

cost of the common man and those who were supposed to  

prevent such fraud calls for a comprehensive investigation  

not only to bring those who were responsible to book but  

also to prevent recurrence of such scams in future.   

23. There  is  yet  another  dimension  of  the  scam  which  

cannot  be  neglected.  That  the  ponzi  companies  operated  

32

Page 33

across State borders is evident not only from the pleadings  

on record but also from the submissions urged in the course  

of the arguments before us.  What is significant is that these  

companies  and  such  other  similar  companies  indulged  in  

similar  fraudulent  activities  in  the  State  of  Assam  and  

Tripura also apart  from Orissa where the depositors  have  

suffered. Looking to the nature of the scam and its inter-  

State ramifications, cases registered in the State of Tripura  

have since been transferred to the CBI for investigation at  

the request of the State Government.  A similar request has  

been  made  by  the  Government  of  Assam  which  has,  

according  to  Mr.  Siddharth  Luthra,  learned  Additional  

Solicitor General, been accepted by the Central Government  

who  is  shortly  issuing  a  notification  under  which  cases  

concerning the scam registered in the State of Assam shall  

stand transferred to the CBI.   

24. That  leaves  us  with  the  State  of  Odisha  where  too  

Saradha Group of  Companies  and a  host  of  similar  other  

companies  appear  to  have  indulged  in  similar  activities  

giving  rise  to  considerable  public  resentment  against  the  

33

Page 34

authorities  for  not  preventing  such  companies  from  

defrauding the innocent public.  Writ Petition (C) Nos.413 of  

2013 and 324 of 2014 seek transfer of such cases registered  

in the State of Odisha to the CBI on the analogy of what was  

done in relation to Tripura and Assam keeping in view the  

magnitude of the scam as also those involved, in the same.   

25. In  Writ  Petition  (C)  No.413 of  2013  we  had by  our  

order dated 26th March, 2014 confined the proceedings to 44  

companies mentioned in two list one filed by Mr. Alok Jena,  

the petitioner in the petition and the other by the Counsel  

for  the  State  Government.  The  involvement  of  these  

companies in the scam had inter-state ramifications besides  

the fact that their collections had exceeded over 500 cores  

each.   

26. It was submitted by counsel for the parties that looking  

to  the  large  number  of  cases  that  had  been  registered,  

transfer of each and every case may work as an impediment  

in the effective investigation of the cases by the CBI.  For all  

intents and purposes, therefore,  proceedings in these two  

writ petitions were confined to a prayer for transfer of cases  

34

Page 35

registered against 44 companies named in the lists filed by  

the counsel for the parties.

27. Since  certain  aspects  of  the  information  considered  

relevant for the transfer of the cases was not forthcoming,  

we had directed the State Government to file an affidavit  

providing  the  said  information.  The  information  related  

primarily to the number of companies involved in the scam  

in the State of Odisha.  The total amount allegedly collected  

by 44 companies referred to in the lists furnished by the  

State  Counsel  and  Counsel  for  the  petitioner.  The  total  

number of claims made by the depositors before Justice R.K.  

Patra Commission set up with the State Government as also  

the total number of properties, seized in regard to the 44  

companies referred to above. The total amount so far paid  

to  the  investors  under  the  orders  or  the  Commission  or  

otherwise and the total number of charge-sheets so far filed.  

Investments  made  in  real  estate  or  otherwise  by  the  44  

companies  were  also  demanded  from the  State  who was  

asked to disclose whether the larger conspiracy angle was  

35

Page 36

being investigated and, if so, furnish the particulars of the  

FIR in which that was being done.   

28. An  affidavit  has  been  filed  by  the  State  of  Odisha  

pursuant to the said directions in which the FIRs where the  

State  Investigating  Agency  is  examining  the  larger  

conspiracy  angle,  have been identified.   A  perusal  of  the  

Affidavit, further, shows that 163 companies were involved  

in  the  chit-fund  scam  in  the  State  of  Odisha  who  have  

collected Rs.4565 crores approximately from the public out  

of which a sum of Rs.2904 crores has been collected by 43  

companies mentioned in the list referred to earlier excluding  

M/s  Nabadiganta  Capital  Services  Ltd.  against  which  no  

criminal case have been registered so far.  The affidavit also  

states  that  7,45,293  envelopes  containing  claim  petitions  

have been received from the depositors by Justice R.K. Patra  

Commission. The affidavit also gives details of the properties  

of the companies seized/sealed in the course of the on-going  

investigation.  The  affidavit  also  refers  to  payment  of  

Rs.24,17,65,866/-  allegedly  made  to  18,596  investors  by  

M/s  Prayag  Infotech  High  Rise  Limited,  Kolkata  and  the  

36

Page 37

willingness  expressed  by  M/s  Rose  Valley  Hotels  and  

Entertainment  Limited  to  pay  back  the  investors.   Larger  

conspiracy angle is according to the affidavit being examined  

in  three  cases.  These  are  (i) CID  PS  Case  No.39  dated  

18.07.2012 under Section 420/120-B IPC read with Sections  

4, 5 and 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes  

(Banning) Act, 1978 registered against M/s Seashore Group  

of Companies, (ii) Case No.44 dated 07.02.2013 under the  

same provisions registered in Kharavelnagar Police Station  

(Bhubaneswar Urban Police District) against M/s Artha Tatwa  

Group of Companies and  (iii) EOW PS Case No.19 dated  

06.06.2013 registered against M/s Astha International Ltd.  

It  was  submitted  that  while  charge  sheets  have  been  

submitted in three cases mentioned above within the period  

of limitation, investigation has been kept open under Section  

173 (8) of the Cr.P.C. to investigate the larger conspiracy  

angle. The affidavit also refers to certain legislations enacted  

in the State of Odisha to protect the interest of depositors.  

It  also  refers  to  certain  interim  orders  passed  by  the  

Government  for  attachment  of  the  properties  of  the  

defaulting companies.   

37

Page 38

29. Appearing  for  the  State  of  Odisha,  Mr.  Gopal  

Subramanium, learned Senior Counsel argued that while this  

Court may transfer for further investigation into the cases  

registered against 44 companies referred to above, any such  

transfer  should  not  hamper  the  attachment  or  recovery  

process  otherwise  initiated  by  the  State  in  terms  of  the  

measures  taken  by  it.  It  was  also  contended  by  Mr.  

Subramanium that public prosecutors appointed by the CBI  

would be assisted by the State Police Officials so that the  

efficacy of the investigation and prosecution are both taken  

care of by the joint efforts that the Central and the State  

police authorities may make.   

30. The factual narrative given in the foregoing paragraphs  

clearly establish the following:

1. That financial scam nicknamed chit-fund scam that  

has hit  the States of West  Bengal,  Tripura,  Assam  

and  Odisha  involves  collection  of  nearly  10,000  

crores  (approx.)from  the  general  public  especially  

the weaker sections of the society which have fallen  

prey to the temptations of handsome returns on such  

38

Page 39

deposits extended by the companies involved in the  

scam.

2. That investigation so far conducted suggests that the  

collection of money from the depositors was neither  

legally permissible nor were such collections/deposits  

invested  in  any  meaningful  business  activity  that  

could  generate  the  high  returns/promised  to  the  

depositors.      

3. That  more  than  25  lac  claims  have  so  far  been  

received by the Commissions of Enquiries set up in  

the  States  of  Odisha  and  West  Bengal  which  is  

indicative  of  the  magnitude  of  scam  in  terms  of  

number of citizens that have been defrauded by the  

ponzi companies.

4. That the companies indulge in ponzi schemes have  

their  tentacles  in  different  States  giving  the  scam  

inter-state ramifications.  That such huge collections  

could  have  international  money  laundering  

dimensions  cannot  be  ruled  out  and  needs  to  be  

effectively investigated.

39

Page 40

5. That  Investigation  so  far  conducted  reveals  

involvement of several political and other influential  

personalities  wielding  considerable  clout  and  

influence.

6. That  the  role  of  regulators  like  SEBI,  authorities  

under the Companies Act and the Reserve Bank of  

India is also under investigation by the State Police  

Agency which  may have to  be  taken to its  logical  

conclusion  by  an  effective  and  independent  

investigation.

31. The  question  is  whether  the  above  features  call  for  

transfer of the ongoing investigation from the State Police to  

the CBI.  Our answer is in the affirmative. Each one of the  

aspects set out above in our view calls for investigation by  

an  independent  agency  like  the  Central  Bureau  of  

Investigation  (CBI).   That  is  because  apart  from  the  

sensitivity  of  the  issues  involved  especially  inter-state  

ramifications  of  the  scam under  investigation,  transfer  of  

cases from the State police have been ordered by this Court  

40

Page 41

also with a view to ensure credibility of such investigation in  

the public perception.  Transfers have been ordered by this  

Court  even in  cases  where the family  members  of  victim  

killed in a firing incident had expressed apprehensions about  

the fairness of the investigation and prayed for entrusting  

the matter to a credible and effective agency like the CBI.  

Investigation  by  the  State  Police  in  a  scam that  involves  

thousands  of  crores  collected  from  the  public  allegedly  

because of the patronage of people occupying high positions  

in the system will  hardly  carry conviction especially  when  

even the regulators who were expected to prevent or check  

such a scam appear to have turned a blind eye to what was  

going on. The State Police Agency has done well in making  

seizures, in registering cases, in completing investigation in  

most  of  the  cases  and  filing  charge-sheets  and  bringing  

those who are responsible to book. The question, however,  

is not whether the State police has faltered. The question is  

whether  what  is  done by the  State  police  is  sufficient  to  

inspire confidence of those who are aggrieved.  While we do  

not consider it necessary to go into the question whether the  

State police have done all  that it ought to have done, we  

41

Page 42

need to point out that money trail has not yet been traced.  

The collections made from the public far exceed the visible  

investment  that  the  investigating  agencies  have  till  now  

identified. So also the larger conspiracy angle in the States  

of  Assam,  Odisha  and  West  Bengal  although  under  

investigation has not made much headway partly because of  

the  inter-state  ramifications,  which  the  Investigating  

Agencies  need  to  examine  but  are  handicapped  in  

examining.   

32. M/s  Vaidyanathan  and  Gopal  Subramanium,  learned  

counsel  for  the  States  of  West  Bengal  and  Odisha  

respectively  argued  that  the  CBI  itself  has  in  a  great  

measure lost its credibility and is no longer as effective and  

independent  as  it  may  have  been  in  the  past.  Similar  

sentiments were expressed by Mr. P.V. Shetty appearing on  

behalf of some of the investors and some other intervenors,  

who followed suit to pursue a similar line of argument.

33. There is, in our opinion, no basis of the apprehension  

expressed by the State Governments. It is true that a lot  

can be said about the independence of  CBI as a premier  

42

Page 43

Investigating  Agency  but  so  long  as  there  is  nothing  

substantial  affecting  its  credibility  it  remains  a  premier  

Investigating  Agency.  Those  not  satisfied  with  the  

performance of the State Police more often than not demand  

investigation by the CBI for it inspires their confidence. We  

cannot, therefore, decline transfer of the cases only because  

of  certain  stray  observations  or  misplaced  apprehensions  

expressed by those connected with the scam or those likely  

to be affected by the investigation. We may in this regard  

gainfully extract the following passage from the decision of  

this  Court  in  Sanjiv  Kumar  v.  State  of  Haryana  and  

Others  (2005) 5 SCC 517, where this Court has lauded  

the CBI as an independent agency that is not only capable of  

but actually shows results:  

“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  delay  does  not  prejudice  the   

43

Page 44

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.”

34. In the circumstances, we are inclined to allow all these  

petitions and direct transfer of the following cases registered  

in different police stations in the State of West Bengal and  

Odisha from the State Police Agency to the Central Bureau  

of Investigation (CBI):   

A.   State of West Bengal:  

1. All cases registered in different police stations of the  

State against Saradha Group of Companies including  

Crime No.102 registered in the Bidhannagar Police  

Station,  Kolkata  (North)  on  6th May,  2013  for  

44

Page 45

offences  punishable  under  Sections  406,  409,  420  

and 120B of the IPC.  

2. All  cases  in  which  the  investigation  is  yet  to  be  

completed  registered  against  any  other  company  

upto the date of this order.

3. The CBI shall be free to conduct further investigation  

in terms of Section 173 (8) of the Cr.P.C. in relation  

to any case where a charge-sheet has already been  

presented before the jurisdictional court against the  

companies involved in any chit-fund scam.   

B.   State of Odisha :   

All cases registered against 44 companies mentioned in  

our  order  dated  26th March,  2014  passed  in  Writ  

Petition (C) No.413 of 2013. The CBI is also permitted  

to conduct further investigations into all such cases in  

which chargesheets have already been filed.     

35. We reserve liberty for the Joint Director CBI, Incharge  

of  the States  of  West  Bengal  and Odisha to  seek further  

directions in relation to transfer of any other case or cases  

45

Page 46

that may require to be transferred for investigation to CBI  

for a full and effective investigation into the scam.   

36. Transfer  of  investigation  to  the  Central  Bureau  of  

Investigation (CBI) in terms of this order shall not, however,  

affect the proceedings pending before the Commissions of  

Enquiry established by the State Government or stall  any  

action that is legally permissible for recovery of the amount  

for  payment  to  the  depositors.  Needless  to  say  that  the  

State Police Agencies currently investigating the cases shall  

provide  the  fullest  cooperation  to  the  CBI  including  

assistance in terms of men and material to enable the latter  

to conduct and complete the investigation expeditiously.

37. The  Enforcement  Directorate  shall,  in  the  meantime,  

expedite the investigation initiated by it into the scam and  

institute  appropriate  proceedings  based  on  the  same  in  

accordance with law.

38. We make it clear that nothing said in this order, shall  

be taken as a final  opinion  as to  the complicity  of  those  

being  investigated  or  others  who  may  be  investigated,  

questioned or interrogated in relation to the scam.

46

Page 47

39. We  do  not  for  the  present  consider  it  necessary  to  

constitute a Monitoring Team to monitor the progress of the  

investigation into the scam. But, we leave the exercise of  

that option open for the future.

40. The  Writ  Petitions  and  T.P.(C)  No.  445  of  2014  are  

disposed of in terms of the above directions. No costs.  

………………………………….…..…J.         (T.S. THAKUR)

     …………………………..……………..J. New Delhi,  (C. NAGAPPAN) May 9, 2014

47