Supreme Court orders investigation of CBI officers for alleged misconduct.
SC UPHOLDS FIR AGAINST CBI OFFICERS FOR ALLEGED MISCONDUCT
CASE SUMMARY – The Supreme Court of India in Vinod Kumar Pandey & Anr. vs. Seesh Ram Saini & Ors. upheld High Court directions to register FIRs against CBI officers Vinod Kumar Pandey and Neeraj Kumar for alleged illegal seizure of documents and intimidation. Despite a CBI preliminary inquiry finding no cognizable offence and a 12-year delay in appeal, the Court ruled that preliminary inquiries cannot prevent FIR registration under Section 154 CrPC when offences are prima facie disclosed. Investigation is to be conducted by a senior Delhi Police officer within three months, with conditional protection from arrest for the officers.
| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | Vinod Kumar Pandey & Anr. vs. Seesh Ram Saini & Ors. |
| Introduction | Supreme Court judgment dated 10 Sept 2025 concerning allegations of misconduct and illegal seizure by CBI officers Vinod Kumar Pandey and Neeraj Kumar. |
| Factual Background | Writ petitions filed in 2001 alleged that CBI officers seized documents without proper seizure memo and intimidated complainants. High Court (2006) directed Delhi Police to register FIR. Appeals and LPAs followed, delayed until Supreme Court hearing in 2025. |
| Legal Issues |
|
| Applicable Law |
|
| Analysis | Court held that preliminary inquiry cannot bar FIR where cognizable offences appear. Delay condoned as officers were pursuing other remedies. High Court’s discretion to order FIR upheld, noting need for investigation of CBI officers to maintain public trust. |
| Conclusion | Appeals partly allowed with modification: Delhi Police (not Special Cell) to investigate; FIR mandatory if prima facie cognizable offence exists. Officers to cooperate; no coercive steps unless necessary. |
| Current Scenario | Investigation ordered to be completed within three months; officers to join probe and protected from arrest unless custodial interrogation required. |
“Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done.”
SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
READ ALSO –
- Constitution of India Art. 226 & 136
- CrPC Sections 154, 197, 482;
- IPC Sections 166, 218, 463, 465, 469, 506, 341, 342, 120-B;
Discover powerful Latin Maxims and Legal Glossary and simplify complex legal terms in seconds.The LawGist ensures exam success with quality Blogs and Articles — Top Legal Picks (TLP), Current Affairs, Recent Supreme Court Judgments, and Step into the world of justice with Courtroom Chronicles. Backed by trusted resources and videos, The LawGist is every Professionals and Aspirant’s first choice. Discover more at thelawgist.org.
