Supreme Court Ruling on CBI and State Government Consent

The Supreme Court has delivered a significant verdict concerning the powers of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in relation to state government consent when investigating central officials.

Judgment Overview

• The CBI does not need the approval of state governments to register an FIR against Central officials posted in different states.
• This ruling overturns a previous decision by the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

Key Aspects of the Case

• Background: The case involved FIRs against central government employees under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) in Andhra Pradesh.
• Petitioner's Argument: The accused argued that the general consent given to the CBI by the undivided Andhra Pradesh was not applicable post-bifurcation, necessitating fresh consent from the newly formed Andhra Pradesh.
• High Court Decision: The Andhra Pradesh High Court had quashed the proceedings based on this argument.

Supreme Court's Interpretation

• The apex court stated that the consent of a state government is not required for the CBI to investigate central offences.
• The offenses in question were under central legislation and involved central government employees, making state consent unnecessary.
• The consent regime under Section 6 of the DSPE Act is not intended to hinder investigations into central offences merely because they occur within a state’s territorial boundaries.

Implications of the Judgment

• This ruling clarifies the scope of the CBI's authority in conducting investigations against central officials across states without needing state consent.
• It emphasizes the CBI's ability to operate under central legislation without state-imposed barriers.