HC orders perjury case against 6 CBI officials

The Delhi high court has directed initiation of criminal proceedings against six Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) officers for allegedly making false statements before the a city court in an assets case against an Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer.

In an October 6 order, a bench of Justice Madhu Jain directed the Special Judge (CBI) to file a written complaint against CBI officials Sushil Dewan, Vineet Vinayak, Amit Kumar, Raman Tyagi, Prem Kumar Gautam and Mohd Azad. The six officials made false statements regarding correspondence with the government on taking further action against IRS officer Ashok Kumar Aggarwal.

The court observed that there was a “reasonable foundation” to the allegations against the officials for offences under Sections 191 (giving false evidence), section 193 (punishment for giving or fabricating false evidence) and 209 (punishment for fraudulently or dishonestly making false claim in court) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Aggarwal was prosecuted by the CBI over allegations that he had acquired assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. In January 2016, the high court had discharged him on the ground of invalid sanction. When the agency explored if they can pursue the case further, the Union law ministry, in an opinion communicated to the agency, said that there appeared to be no reasonable ground to pursue the matter. In July 2016, Aggarwal applied to the special judge for release of the documents seized during CBI investigation.

CBI, however, opposed Aggarwal’s plea, saying citing ongoing correspondence with the administrative ministry over further legal action.

Aggarwal moved a separate application in August 2016 for initiation of criminal proceedings against the officers who authorised the filing of the reply, alleging that CBI’s statement was factually incorrect.

The trial court allowed the application for release of documents in May 2018. However, on October 25, 2025, the court dismissed the application for initiation of criminal proceedings, following which Aggarwal moved the high court.