Case Summary: Janata Dal vs H.S. Chowdhary & Others (1992)
(1992) 08 SC CK 0014
In The Supreme Court of India
Case No: Criminal Appeal No's. 304 of 1991 Etc. Etc.
Janata Dal (Appellant) Vs H.S. Chowdhary and Others (Respondent)
Date of Decision: 28-08-1992
Hon'ble Judges: S. Ratnavel Pandian, J; K. Jayachandra Reddy, J
Bench: Division Bench
Final Decision: Disposed Of
Name of the Court
The Supreme Court of India
All Citations
AIR 1993 SC 892; AIR 1992 SC 892; (1993) CriLJ 600; (1992) 3 Crimes 199; (1992) 5 JT 213; (1992) 2 SCALE 338; (1992) 4 SCC 305; (1992) 1 SCR 226 Supp
[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=265181
Facts of the Case
In 1980, the Ministry of Defence approved procurement of 155 mm calibre medium guns. After a selection process, the contract was awarded to M/s A.B. Bofors of Sweden in March 1986 for 410 guns. In April 1987, Swedish Radio alleged bribes had been paid to Indian politicians and officials. The Government of India and Bofors denied these allegations. A Swedish National Audit Bureau report indicated commission payments to certain entities, but names were withheld due to bank secrecy. A Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) was formed in 1987 to investigate but found no evidence of illegal payments under Indian law. In 1990, the CBI registered an FIR against 14 accused, citing bribes and violations of law in the Bofors deal.
Law Points Raised
1. Scope and maintainability of writ petitions under Article 32 in criminal investigation matters.
2. Authority of courts to direct investigation by CBI in sensitive defence procurement cases.
3. Applicability of Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC provisions to foreign companies and individuals.
4. Jurisdictional limits in pursuing allegations involving foreign bank accounts and secrecy laws.
5. Whether JPC findings can preclude further criminal investigation.
Acts / Provisions / Articles Referred
• Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32
• Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Sections 156(3), 166A, 397, 401, 482
• Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 120B, 161, 162, 163, 164
• Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947
Judgements Referred
Relevant past rulings on maintainability of writ petitions under Article 32 and court powers in directing investigations were cited, though specific case names are not explicitly detailed in the judgment.
Obiter Dicta
The Court emphasized that political controversies should not obstruct due process of law. Judicial intervention must be exercised cautiously in matters involving national defence contracts and sensitive international dealings.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that criminal investigations into serious allegations of corruption in defence procurement are maintainable and necessary, even if preliminary inquiries (such as JPC) found no conclusive evidence. The FIR by CBI was validly registered based on available material.
Final Ruling
The appeals and writ petitions were disposed of. The Court allowed the CBI investigation to proceed without interference, affirming the need for thorough inquiry into allegations of bribery and corruption.
Relevant Paragraph Numbers
Paras: 3–23, 19–20, 21–23, 112
Summary
This landmark case, emerging from the Bofors gun deal scandal, reaffirmed the judiciary's role in ensuring accountability in public contracts. The Court upheld the validity of the CBI's FIR and emphasized that even high-profile political and defence procurement matters are subject to legal scrutiny.
[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=265181