Supreme Court Quashes Special Court Order Against Late Former PM Dr Manmohan Singh; Closes His Case On Merits In Coal Block Scam

The Supreme Court has set aside a Special Court order that had taken cognizance against former Prime Minister, the late Dr. Manmohan Singh, in the long-pending coal block allocation case.

The matter pertained to an appeal challenging the order passed by the Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act, 1988, which had rejected two separate closure reports submitted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and issued criminal summonses against Dr. Singh and five others under Section 120B read with Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d)(iii) of the PC Act.

The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana held, "Having regard to the well-known parameters consistently laid down by this Court regarding the acceptance or rejection of investigation reports filed by an investigating agency, we are satisfied that there were no compelling reasons for the Learned Special Judge to turn down the closure reports filed by the CBI and take cognizance...Consequently, we allow this appeal and set aside the impugned judgment dated 16th December 2020 and the subsequent order dated 11th March 2015 passed by the Learned Special Judge. As a result, the two closure reports filed by the CBI are accepted, and the matter against the appellant is closed on merits."

Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for Dr Manmohan Singh, while Senior Advocate R.S. Cheema appeared for CBI.

During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal submitted before the bench that while the appeal would ordinarily abate due to the unfortunate demise of the former Prime Minister, the adverse observations made by the Special Judge against Dr. Singh warranted immediate judicial review and effacement.

Sibal highlighted that despite the investigating agency twice filing closure reports giving a clean chit to Dr. Singh, the trial judge rejected the findings and took cognizance based on a flawed interpretation of strict liability.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi similarly urged the court to dispose of Dr Singh's appeal on the day of the hearing, given the circumstances of his passing.

Justice Bagchi remarked, "Our concern is, in spite of your investigating agency giving a closure report... twice... the judge does not accept it. He can make certain observations, perhaps..."

Senior Advocate R.S. Cheema, appearing as Special Public Prosecutor for the CBI, informed the court that the agency had not supported the Special Judge's order and had independently recommended closure.

Although Cheema pointed out that certain constitutional questions—including the vires of Section 13(1)(d)(iii) of the PC Act—were raised across connected matters, the bench, comprising Justice Bagchi and colleagues, observed that the core issue was whether the trial judge exceeded jurisdiction in rejecting the CBI's closure reports without compelling grounds.

The Court said, "This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16th December 2020 passed by the Learned Special Judge, Special Court, PC Act (CBI-07), Patiala House Courts, New Delhi. By the impugned order, the Special Judge took cognizance of the offences under Section 120B read with Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d)(iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against six accused persons, including the appellant, the late Dr. Manmohan Singh, former Prime Minister of India. It may be noted at the outset that this matter was investigated by the CBI. We may note that two closure reports were filed by the CBI — the first dated 27th August 2014 and the second dated 21st October 2014. On 27th August 2014 and 21st October 2014, the CBI filed closure reports giving a clean chit to the appellant."

"However, the Learned Special Judge, for the reasons assigned in the impugned order, turned down and set aside those closure reports and took cognizance against the appellant. Consequently, vide subsequent order dated 11th March 2015, the Special Judge summoned him along with the other accused to face trial. Ordinarily, this appeal could be disposed of as having become infructuous due to the unfortunate demise of the appellant. However, in order to appreciate whether there were sufficient material and good reasons on record to take cognizance and consequently summon the appellant to face trial, we have gone through both closure reports filed by the CBI with the able assistance of the Learned Senior Counsel for the parties", the Court added.

Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgments dated December 16, 2020, and March 11, 2015, accepted the CBI closure reports on merits, and formally closed all proceedings against the late Prime Minister while directing that connected appeals involving co-accused persons be listed separately.

Cause Title: Dr Manmohan Singh v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors. [Crl.A. No. 562-563/2015]