In a landmark order, the Court mandates CBI probe into Airport PS Case No. 5 of 2026, highlighting need for impartial inquiry amid high-profile political and bureaucratic allegations, while staying further police investigation.
Ranchi, March 11, 2026: The Jharkhand High Court, presided over by Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, delivered a significant judgment in the criminal writ petition filed by Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials challenging the FIR lodged against them by an accused informant, Santosh Kumar. The case concerns allegations of custodial torture and misconduct against the petitioners, who are officers of the ED involved in sensitive investigations related to the misappropriation of government funds.
The FIR, registered as Airport Police Station Case No. 5 of 2026, involved charges under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including voluntarily causing grievous hurt, attempt to murder, criminal intimidation, and acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention. The petitioners, Assistant Director and Assistant Enforcement Officer of the ED Ranchi Zonal Office, contended that the informant, Santosh Kumar, who is himself an accused in a large-scale Rs. 23 Crore misappropriation scam (Peyjal Scam), concocted the allegations as a tactic to stall and disrupt ongoing investigations against influential political figures and senior bureaucrats, including the Chief Minister and former Minister of Jharkhand.
The informant had allegedly appeared at the ED office without summons and self-inflicted a head injury by striking a water jug against his own head during a preliminary interaction, as per the petitioners. Medical examinations corroborated the self-inflicted nature of the injury. However, Santosh Kumar lodged the FIR accusing the ED officials of custodial violence.
The petitioners sought quashing of the FIR or alternatively, the transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for a free and impartial inquiry, arguing that the State Police showed bias and acted in haste under influence of powerful individuals. They also requested the registration of an FIR against Santosh Kumar for false allegations and obstruction.
The Court was faced with complex questions surrounding the jurisdiction, the nature of the allegations, and the need for impartial investigation. The State government opposed the transfer, asserting the FIR's validity and the State Police's right to investigate, while the informant denied self-infliction of injuries and raised concerns about suppression of crucial CCTV evidence, invoking Supreme Court directions on installation and preservation of CCTV footage in investigative agencies.
After extensive hearing and consideration of relevant precedents, including landmark Supreme Court judgments on custodial torture, police investigation, and transfer of cases to CBI, the Jharkhand High Court observed:
1. The ongoing investigations by the ED involve high-profile persons and have significant public ramifications, necessitating stringent judicial scrutiny.
2. Allegations of bias and misuse of police machinery by the State authorities, coupled with the contentious circumstances surrounding the FIR, justify exceptional intervention.
3. The Court underscored the importance of a fair and impartial investigation, essential to uphold the rule of law and public confidence in the justice system.
4. Recognizing the sensitivity and complexity of the matter, the Court directed the immediate transfer of the FIR investigation from the State Police to the CBI, emphasizing that such a step must be sparingly used but is warranted here to ensure credibility and transparency.
5. The Court stayed further proceedings and police investigation in the Airport PS Case No. 5 of 2026 pending CBI's registration and investigation.
6. The Court also directed the preservation of all evidence, including CCTV footage, and underscored the responsibility of the State police and security agencies to maintain order at the ED office.
This decision reflects the judiciary’s commitment to safeguarding the independence of investigative processes, especially in cases implicating powerful individuals and involving allegations of custodial violence. It also reinforces the principle that investigations must be free from external pressures and conducted by agencies perceived as neutral to maintain public trust.
The CBI has been entrusted with the responsibility to register the case afresh and conduct a thorough investigation in accordance with law. The Airport Police Station is directed to hand over all relevant documents and materials to the CBI forthwith.
This ruling also reiterates the constitutional mandate under Article 226 empowering High Courts to direct CBI investigations in exceptional circumstances to secure justice and uphold fundamental rights.
Bottom Line:
Allegations against Enforcement Directorate officials and complexities surrounding the investigation into high-profile cases warrant transfer of FIR investigation from State Police to CBI for ensuring fair and impartial inquiry.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 109(2), 115(2), 117(2), 127(2), 351(2), 352, 238, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Section 67 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002; Sections 154, 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Articles 226 of the Constitution of India.
This news report summarizes the complex interplay of allegations, legal arguments, and judicial reasoning in the Jharkhand High Court’s order, providing a comprehensive overview for readers interested in criminal law, police investigations, and judicial interventions in India.
Pratik v. State of Jharkhand, (Jharkhand) : Law Finder Doc id # 2864566
