By Justice Madhu Jain of the Delhi High Court passed the order on October 6, 2026.
Justice Jain allowed a plea by a former IRS officer.
Justice Jain found a materially false assertion in a 2016 CBI reply to a trial court.
Justice Jain directed the Special Judge, CBI, to file a complaint within four weeks.
Justice Jain clarified that the direction is not a finding of guilt.
The High Court found that only an internal CBI deliberation was taking place at that time, and that no such correspondence with the ministry existed.
The case arose from CBI proceedings against a former Indian Revenue Service officer in a disproportionate assets case.
In January 2016, the High Court held the sanction for the officer’s prosecution invalid, and the officer was discharged.
In June 2016, the Ministry of Law and Justice gave an opinion that there appeared to be no reasonable ground to pursue the matter before a higher forum.
The opinion was communicated to the CBI through the Department of Personnel and Training on July 1, 2016.
The court examined successive drafts of the CBI’s reply.
An earlier draft said that the Department of Personnel and Training had rejected the appeal proposal, and that text was deleted and replaced with handwritten words saying correspondence was under way.
The court said this was not mere imprecise wording, and that there was a reasonable foundation for the allegations, according to Bar and Bench.
The court said there was a reasonable foundation for offences under Sections 191, 193 and 209 of the Indian Penal Code.
Section 191 deals with giving false evidence, Section 193 with punishment for false evidence, and Section 209 with a dishonest false claim in court.
The Special Judge, CBI, has been directed to file a written complaint against the six officers with the jurisdictional Magistrate within four weeks.
Court gavel (representative image), Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0
