A

SYNOPSIS

ON

"COMPULSORY LICENSING OF PATENTS IN INDIA"

Submitted to Submitted by

Dr. P.C. Mishra Mohit Kumar

(Asst. Professor) L.L.M. (CCL)

Roll No. 201610301020024

SRI RAM SWAROOP MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY

Session- 2017
 CONTENTS

Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
Chapter II
TO EXAMINE AND ANALYSE THE
STATUS OF CBI UNDER INDIAN LAW
Chapter III
TO EXAMINE THE ROLE AND

POWER RELATING TO CBI

Chapter IV
TO EXAMINE & ANALYSING THE BROAD CATEGORIES
CRIMINAL CASES HANDLED BY CBI

Chapter V
TO EXAMINE JURISDICTION OF SPECIAL POLICE
ESTABLISHMENT ACT 1946 VIS- A VIS STATE POLICE

Chapter VI
TO EXAMINE LAW PASSED IN PROBLEM INDIA

Chapter VII
`CRITICISM OF SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT 1946

References ............................................................................
 CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTIONk
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was established vide
Resolution No. 4/31/61-T, dated 1st April, 1963 of the Ministry of Home
Affairs, Government of India, which reads as follows: The Government
of India have had under consideration the establishment of a Central
Bureau of Investigation for the investigation of crimes at present handled
by the Delhi Special Police Establishment, including specially important
cases under the Defence of India Act and Rules particularly of hoarding,
blackmarketin

g and profiteering in essential commodities, which may have

repercussions and ramifications, in several States: the collection of
intelligence relating to certain types of crimes; participation in the role of
the National Central Bureau connected with the International Criminal
Police Organization; the maintenance of crime statistics and
dissemination of information relating to crime and criminals; the study
of specialized crime of particular interest to the Government of India or
crimes having all-India or interstate ramifications or of particular
importance from the social points of view; the conduct of Police
research; and the coordination of laws relating to crime.

As a first step in that direction, the Government of India have decided to

set up with effect from Ist April, 1963 Central Bureau of of Investigation
at New Delhi with the following six Divisions, namely:
 CHATPER-2
TO EXAMINE AND ANALYSE THE
STATUS OF CBI UNDER INDIAN LAW
The Government of India have had under consideration the
establishment of a Central Bureau of Investigation for the investigation
of crimes at present handled by the Delhi Special Police Establishment,
including specially important cases under the Defence of India Act and
Rules particularly of hoarding, black marketing and profiteering in
essential commodities, which may have repercussions and ramifications
in several States; the collection of intelligence relating to certain types of
crimes, participation in the work of the National Central Bureau
connected with the International Criminal Police Organization; the
maintenance of crime statistics and dissemination of information relating
to crime and criminals, the study of specialized crime of particular
interest to the Government of India or crimes having all-India or
interstate ramifications or of particular interest to the Government of
India or crimes having all India or interstate ramifications or of particular
importance from the social point of view; the conduct of Police research,
and the coordination of laws relating to crime. As a first step in that
direction, the Government Of India have decided to set up with effect
from 1st April, 1963 a Central Bureau of Investigation at Delhi with the
following six Divisions, namely :-
 CHAPTER-3

TO EXAMINE THE ROLE AND

POWER RELATING TO CBI

Investigating Officers of CBI are authorized to conduct investigation into

the offences notified by Central Government under Section 3 of the
Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. While investigation of the
said offences may be taken up in the Union Territories, a notification
from the Central Government is required to be issued under Section 5 of
the DSPE Act, 1946 with the consent of the State Government concerned
under Section 6 of the said Act to enable investigation to be conducted in
the territories of different States. Consent once given in any particular
case cannot be withdrawn as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in K. Chandrasekhar etc. v. State of Kerala [JT 1998 (3) SC 612].

14.2 The powers of investigation as granted by the DSPE Act do not vest
any different powers other than those laid down in the Cr.P.C. 1973.
Under Section 156 of the Cr.P.C. 1973, all Officers of and above the rank
of an Officer in charge of a Police Station have statutory authority to
investigate cognizable offences. Under Section 157 (i) Cr.P.C., 1973
such Officers are empowered to depute subordinate Officers to proceed
to the spot to investigate the facts and circumstances of the case and, if
necessary, to take measures for the discovery and arrest of the
offender(s). Officers of CBI of or above the rank of Sub-Inspector are
empowered under Section 2(3) of the DSPE Act, 1946 to exercise the
powers of the Officer-in-charge of a Police station for the purpose of
investigation of any case. Therefore, no independent enquiries/
investigation can be entrusted to Assistant Sub-Inspectors of Police or
Head Constables in the CBI. In cases registered under the Prevention of
Corruption Act 1988 only Officers of the rank of Inspector and above of
CBI are authorized to investigate except in the state of Jammu &
Kashmir (J&K). In J&K, under provisions of J&K Prevention of
Corruption Act, only Officers of the rank of Deputy Superintendent of
Police and above are authorized to investigate cases pertaining to the
offences under the said Act.

14.3 As such, Sub-Inspector of Police (Inspectors/Sub-Inspectors in case

of J&K) shall not investigate cases under the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1988 without obtaining prior permission of the Magistrate under
Section 17 of the said Act. The Superintendent of Police shall forward an

application for permission to investigate cases under the Prevention of

Corruption Act by a Sub Inspector (Inspector or Sub-Inspector in case of
J&K P.C.Act) to the Magistrate, mentioning therein the reasons for
entrusting the case to the above-mentioned ranks of Officers. Similarly,
an Officer of the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police can only
investigate offences under some special Acts like Immoral Traffic
(Prevention) Act, Information Technology Act etc.
 CHAPTER-4

TO EXAMINE & ANALYSING THE BROAD CATEGORIES

CRIMINAL CASES HANDLED BY CBI

The CBI may receive complaints dealing with various issues/ matters
from different quarters including the general public. Every complaint,
from whatever source received, will be entered in the Complaint sub-
module of CRIMES Module or in the temporary Complaint Register
maintained in the Branch Offices. Each complaint received, whether
directly or from any other Branch or Head Office, will be assigned a
temporary number as stipulated from time to time. If the complaint
pertains to jurisdiction of any other Branch it should be forwarded to the
concerned Branch without any delay. No verification of any complaint
shall be initiated except after it has been assigned a regular complaint
number with the approval of the Competent Authority as detailed in the
paragraphs below. All complaints will be treated as "confidential" at all
stages Processing of Complaints 8.2 Superintendents of Police
(including those working in the Special Units), are required to have a
preliminary look at each complaint and decide whether it falls within the
purview of CBI and would merit its attention. In case the complaint
pertains to a subject outside the purview of CBI or the allegations
contained therein are too trivial or vague it should be forwarded at the
earliest to the department concerned with an endorsement that no
enquiry has been made by CBI. The disposal would be noted in the
records maintained for this purpose 8.3 All other complaints would be
analysed with a view to see whether a criminal offence can be made out
requiring any action by CBI. In case, the analysis reveals that the
complaint deals with a substantial issue which falls within the ambit of
CBI and needs further verification, the permission of the Competent
Authority will be obtained to verify the same. The Competent Authority
is one who could order registration of a Regular Case for the particular
rank of officer against whom the complaint has been made. In case, the
level of the public servant against whom the allegations have been made
is not known, the SP of the Branch may initiate verification at his own
level but during the course of secret verification if involvement of any
senior officer figures, for which permission was not taken earlier,
necessary orders of the Competent Authority should be obtained to
conduct verification against the suspect officer.
 CHAPTER-5

TO EXAMINE JURISDICTION OF SPECIAL POLICE

ESTABLISHMENT ACT 1946 VIS- A VIS STATE POLICE

The CBI can investigate only offences or classes of offences as are

notified by the Central Government under Section 3 of the DSPE Act. A
list of such offences issued by the Central Government under Section 3
is circulated periodically by the Legal Division now known as the
Directorate of Prosecution (Annexure 1-C) Extension of powers and
jurisdiction of SPE to areas other than Union Territories 1.9 The Central
Government may, by order, extend to any area (including Railway
areas), besides Union Territories, the powers and jurisdiction of members
of the CBI for the investigation of any offences or classes of offences
specified in a Notification under Section 3 of the DSPE Act subject to
the consent of the Government of the concerned State under Section 6 of
the Act. JURISDICTION OF DSPE VIS--VIS STATE POLICE 1.10
Even though the CBI/DSPE is empowered to investigate all offences
notified by the Central Government under Section 3 of the DSPE Act,
1946, it does not take up all such cases keeping in view its limited
resources and its powers being concurrent and coextensive with those of
the State Police Forces, which if exercised without coordination with the
State Police, might lead to conflict and duplication of efforts. To avoid
such duplication, an administrative arrangement has been arrived at by
CBI with the State Police Forces, according to which: 1.10.1 The cases,
which are substantially and essentially against Central Government
employees or concerning affairs of the Central Government, shall be
investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) although
certain employees of the State Government may also be involved. The
State Police or State Anti-Corruption Bureau/Vigilance set-up, when
informed of such cases involving their employees, will render necessary
assistance to the CBI, during investigation and prosecution of such cases.
1.10.2 The cases, which are essentially and substantially against State
Government employees or are in respect of matters concerning the State
Government shall be investigated by the State Police irrespective of the
fact that certain employees of the Central Government are also involved
as co-accused. In such cases, the Delhi Special Police Establishment
(CBI), when informed, will assist the State Police or State Anti-
Corruption/Vigilance set-up, if necessary, in completing the
investigation. 1.10.3 In addition to cases involving Central Government
employees, the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) is authorized to
investigate cases of the following categories:
 CHAPTER-6

TO EXAMINE LAW PASSED IN PROBLEM INDIA

Extradition may be briefly described as the surrender of an alleged or

convicted criminal by one State to another. More precisely, extradition
may be defined as the process by which one State upon the request of
another surrenders to the latter a person found within its jurisdiction for
trial and punishment or, if he has been already convicted, only for
punishment, on account of a crime punishable by the laws of the
requesting State and committed outside the territory of the requested
State. Extradition plays an important role in the international battle
against crime. It owes its existence to the so-called principle of
territoriality of criminal law, according to which a State will not apply its
penal statutes to acts committed outside its own boundaries except where
the protection of special national interests is at stake. In view of the
solidarity of nations in the repression of criminality, however, a State,
though refusing to impose direct penal sanctions to offences committed
abroad, is usually willing to cooperate otherwise in bringing the
perpetrator to justice lest he goes unpunished.
ICPO-Interpol has been a forerunner in international efforts to improve
and accelerate existing procedure of extradition. Apart from attempts by
academic bodies such as the Harvard Research Draft Convention on
Extradition, the ICPO-Interpol was the first international organization to
recommend to member countries a Draft General Agreement for the
Extradition of Offenders, which unfortunately has remained a dead letter
since it was adopted by the General Assembly of the Organization (then
known as the International Criminal Police Commission) in 1948.
Interpol's interest in finding ways of improving the extradition process
did not end with the failure of the Draft General Agreement. Since the
early fifties, the General Secretariat of the ICPO-Interpol has undertaken
on behalf of the member countries two new activities intended to
facilitate international police co-operation in matters relating to
extradition.
The first of these initiatives concerns the publication of a series of
circulars on a country basis, setting out the provisional measures that the
police in each country may take when complying with a request from the
police of another member country for quick action with a view to
identification and arrest of a person wanted on a warrant of arrest. The
second initiative taken by the ICPO-Interpol consists in the
dissemination of national extradition laws. This activity is based on a
resolution of the General Assembly passed in 1967 in Tokyo (Japan)
inviting member countries to forward the texts of their extradition laws
to the General Secretariat so that the latter may send them to other
member countries for their information. The pre-extradition circulars and
the texts of extradition laws of the member countries received from the
General Secretariat are being maintained in the Interpol Wing.

In India the extradition of a fugitive from India to a foreign country or

vice-versa is governed by the provisions of Indian Extradition Act, 1962.
The basis of extradition could be a treaty between India and a foreign
country. Under section 3 of this Act, a notification could be issued by the
Government of India extending the provisions of the Act to the
country/countriesnotified.
 CHAPTER- 7

CRITICISM OF SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT 1946

The Central Bureau of Investigation traces its origins to the Special

Police Establishment, which was set up in 1941 by the government. The
functions of the SPE were to investigate bribery and corruption in
transactions with the War and Supply Department of India, set up during
World War II with its headquarters in Lahore. The Superintendent of the
War Department and the SPE was Khan Bahadur Qurban Ali Khan, who
later became governor of the North West Frontier Province at the
creation of Pakistan. The first legal advisor of the War Department
was Rai Sahib Karam Chand Jain. After the end of the war, there was a
continued need for a central governmental agency to investigate bribery
and corruption by central-government employees. Rai Sahib Karam
Chand Jain remained its legal advisor when the department was
transferred to the Home Department by the 1946 Delhi Special Police
Establishment Act.

The DSPE's scope was enlarged to cover all departments of the

Government of India. Its jurisdiction extended to the Union Territories,
and could be further extended to the states with the consent of the state
governments involved. Sardar Patel, first Deputy Prime Minister of free
India and head of the Home Department, desired to weed out corruption
in erstwhile princely states such as Jodhpur, Rewa and Tonk. Patel
directed Legal Advisor Karam Chand Jain to monitor criminal
proceedings against the dewans and chief ministers of those states.
The DSPE acquired its popular current name, Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI), through a Home Ministry resolution dated 1.4.1963.

CBI takes shape

The CBI established a reputation as India's foremost investigative

agency with the resources for complicated cases, and it was requested to
assist the investigation of crimes such as murder, kidnapping and
terrorism. The Supreme Court and a number of high courts in the country
also began assigning such investigations to the CBI on the basis of
petitions filed by aggrieved parties. In 1987, the CBI was divided into
two divisions: the Anti-Corruption Division and the Special Crimes
Division.

D. P. Kohli

The founding director of the CBI was D. P. Kohli, who held the office
from 1 April 1963 to 31 May 1968. Before this, Kohli was Inspector-
general of police for the Special Police Establishment from 1955 to 1963
and held law-enforcement positions in Madhya Bharat (as chief of
police), Uttar Pradesh and local central-government offices. For
distinguished service, Kohli was awarded the Padma Bhushan in 1967.

Kohli saw in the Special Police Establishment the potential to growing

into a National Investigative Agency. He nurtured the organisation
during his long career as inspector general and director and laid the
foundation on which the agency grew.
 REFERENCES

1. "cbi_annual_report_2011" (PDF). p. 62. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-05-03.

Retrieved 14 February 2013. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name
"cbi_annual_report_2011" defined multiple times with different
content (see the help page). Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name
"cbi_annual_report_2011" defined multiple times with different
content (see the help page).

2. Jump up^ "CBI chief Ranjit Sinha's roadmap to unshackle agency from five govt
entities". India Today. 10 May 2013. Retrieved 2013-05-19.

3. Jump up^ "CVC Act" (PDF). CVC. Retrieved 30 April 2012.

4. ^ Jump up to:a b "PM inaugurates new CBI headquarters building". Indian Express. 2011-
04-30. Retrieved 2013-04-26.

5. Jump up^ "Welcome to CBI Academy School of eLearning". cbiacademy.gov.in.

6. ^ Jump up to:a b "Supreme Court judgement on power of courts to order CBI probe".
indiankanoon.org. Retrieved 11 July 2012.

7. Jump up^ "Courts can order CBI probe without states' consent: SC". The Economic
Times. 17 February 2010. Retrieved 11 July 2012.

8. Jump up^ "CBI history and former directors". CBI. Retrieved 22 December 2011.

9. Jump up^ "Central Information Commission slams CBI's proposed exemption from RTI".
3 July 2011. Retrieved 2 June 2012.

10. Jump up^ Venky Vembu (Mar 21, 2013). "CBIs on-off raids: How Congress Bureau of
Investigation works". firstpost.com. Retrieved 2013-04-26.

11. Jump up^ Mohan, Vishwa (27 November 2006). "Origin of Hawala funds were not
traced". India Times.

12. Jump up^ "CBI Arrests Own Cop in Bribery Case". The Outlook India. 17 September
2012. Retrieved 18 September 2012.

13. Jump up^ "Adarsh Scam: CBI Arrests Own Lawyer, Ex-Cong MLC". 6 March 2012.
Retrieved27 March 2012.
14. Jump up^ Saikat Datta (21 September 2009). "Grease on the Lens". outlookindia.com.
Retrieved9 October 2010.

15. Jump up^ Anshuman G Dutta (4 June 2011). "CBI is harassing me". mid-day.com.
Retrieved14 June 2011.

16. Jump up^ "CBI has long history of listening to its political masters voice". The Sunday
Guardian. Retrieved 1 February 2012.

17. Jump up^ "Restoring Public Confidence in CBI". outlook india. 30 December 2010.
Retrieved1 February 2012.

18. Jump up^ "The Congress Bureau of Investigation: Big stick politics. Will it ever end?".
Open The Magazine. 6 April 2013. Retrieved 22 Apr 2013.

19. Jump up^ "CBI ineffective in dealing with political cases". The Guardian. 26 Jan 2013.
Retrieved2013-05-19.

20. Jump up^ "Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) India".

21. Jump up^ "Bofors scam: Quattrocchi off CBI's wanted list". The Times of India (NEW
DELHI). 28 Apr 2009. Retrieved 22 December 2011.

22. Jump up^ "Vineet Narain Case, Directions of the Court" (PDF). 2 November 2006.

23. Jump up^ J. Venkatesan (29 August 2010). "CBI putting pressure on me: Geeta
Johri". The Hindu. Retrieved 9 October 2010.

24. Jump up^ Ritu Sarin (30 January 2010). "For his Padma, Chatwal should thank two
directors of the CBI". The Indian Express. Retrieved 14 June 2011.