ORDER : All the three writ petitions are being heard together as common issues are involved in these writ petitions, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. W.P.(PIL) No.7176 of 2017 2. The writ petition bearing W.P.(PIL) No.7176 of 2017 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred inter alia for grant of following reliefs:- i) For the direction upon the respondents no. 4 and 5, to investigate the Vigilance P.S. Case No.49/10 registered on 06.10.2010, under section 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and sec 13(1)(d) P.C. Act 1988, as the audit can has detected mass scale financial irregularities committed in 34th National Games by the accused persons and due to the influence of the high profile persons like, Ex Union Minister, Ex-Chief Minister and the Investigating Officers and the then DIG and were ADG manages after receiving huge amount through Hawala, as it is evident from the conversations of R.K.Anand and others, who were directly benefited from the misdirected and delay investigation. ii) For the direction upon the respondents to investigate the involvement of officers, like the then Additional Director General of Police, Mr. Neeraj Sinha, the then Deputy Director General of Police, and Shailendra Kumar Sinha, the then Investigating Officer, who has taken money through middle men and has managed the case against Mr. R.K.Anand, Ex-M.P., and Sr. Advocate/President of Jharkhand Olympic Association, where, the role of Subodh Kant Sahay, the ex Union Minister and the then as is evident from the conversation of the R.K.Anand and Prabhat Sharma, Sanjay Sharma, Neel Kamal, Santosh and others (hawala Agents), Chetan Anand, Son of R.K.Anand, Advocate Supreme Court/High Court indicates to what extent the vigilance Bureau/A.C.B. was sold its interest by these officers. iii) For the direction upon the Enforcement Directorate to investigate the properties (both movable and immovable) earned illegally by the respondents no. 11 and 12 by misusing their office and interfering in the investigation of the 34th National Games, where money worth crores of rupees exchanged hands and as a result, the criminal cases against such high profile people has been managed till date and even today also the officers are influenced due to might of R.K.Anand, therefore rest of the three accused has been charge sheeted except R.K.Anand. 3. 3. The fact which led the writ petitioner to invoke the jurisdiction conferred to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the aforesaid directions, reads as under :- It is the case of the writ petitioner that 34th National Games were organized under the auspices of National Games Organizing Committee/Jharkhand Olympic Association. During organizing the games, crores have been spent, wherein, it has been detected that there is an embezzlement of huge amount by the organizers of the games. One Bhola Nath Singh, lodged a F.I.R. in the Vigilance Bureau to investigate the embezzlement of public money, which was registered as Vigilance Case No.49/2010 dated 06.10.2010. The matter was investigated and the allegations were found true against three persons, namely, Madhu Kant Pathak, S.M.Hashmi and P.C. Mishra, whereas the allegations against Mr. R.K.Anand, during the relevant time, was still under investigation since 2010. It is the grievance of the writ petitioner that since 2010, the investigation of the said case is pending only against Mr. R.K.Anand, the President, Jharkhand Olympic Association due to the reasons evident from the audio conversations of various respondents and the Hawala operators. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that the transcript of audio-conversations between R.K.Anand, Prabhat Sharma, Sanjay Sharma, Chetan Anand and Hawala Agents indicate that as to how, the money has changed hands from Delhi to Ranchi, through Hawala in Special Case No.66/2010. It is also the case of the writ petitioner that he possesses the C.D. where the true conversation of R.K.Anand and others are there. It has further been stated that the final form has been filed being Final Form No.02/2015 dated 09.01.2015 against Prakash Chand Mishra, Sayed Matlub Hashmi and Madhukant Pathak, whereas the investigation has not been completed against R.K. Anand till date. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that Mr. R.K.Anand, Ex-M.P. of the political party, namely, Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) along with his son namely, Chetan Anand, Prabhat Sharma and Sanjay Sharma are managing the investigating officer of the case namely Shailendra Kumar Sinha and the then Additional Director General of Poilice, Mr. Neeraj Sinha. It is the further case that money has been admitted to be paid to the police officers through Hawala agents and due to that reason the investigation is still going on against Mr. R.K. Anand. W.P.(S) No.5788 of 2018 4. Neeraj Sinha. It is the further case that money has been admitted to be paid to the police officers through Hawala agents and due to that reason the investigation is still going on against Mr. R.K. Anand. W.P.(S) No.5788 of 2018 4. This writ petition has been preferred for the following reliefs:- (A) For the direction upon the respondents no.4 to immediately hand over investigation to respondent 7 & 8 as they are incapable of investigating the sports complex construction scam which is pending with them since long for more than eight years or, so, and even after the order of this Hon‘ble Court in W.P.(PIL) No.7719/12 by this Hon‘ble a bench headed by Hon‘ble the Chief Justice and Hon‘ble Mr. Justice S.Chandrasekhar, on 31.1.2014, but till date it has not been complete, showing all disrespect possible to the order of this Hon‘ble Court. (B) For the direction upon the respondents especially respondent no.5 and 6 to submit the status report of investigation, as the petitioner has already approached before the respondent no.5 and 6 long time back in the year 2008, but till date the respondents have not done anything with regard to the investigation. 5. The brief facts of this case, as per the pleadings are as under :- It is the case of the writ petitioner that he had approached this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 wherein, this Court has directed the Vigilance Bureau (now Anti-Corruption Bureau) to complete the investigation in the construction of Mega Sports Complex, but till date in spite of the order of this Court, investigation has not been completed. It is the further case of the writ petitioner by making reference of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Sports Department on 02.09.2013 and 17.09.2013, that the stand taken therein are contradictory to each other as one affidavit speaks about the fact that investigation pertaining to commission of irregularities in the construction of Mega Sports Complex has been handed over to then Vigilance Bureau whereas the other affidavit speaks that the investigation pertaining to the said irregularity has not been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau (now Anti-Corruption Bureau). Such direction has been passed by this Court taking into consideration the fact that the State Government and the Central Government has given enough fund to the State of Jharkhand so that an infrastructure can be developed in the city of Ranchi, Dhanbad and Jamshedpur so that the games can be conducted successfully. For Mega Sports Complex a meeting was held under the Chairmanship of the then Chief Minister of Jharkhand on 16.01.2002 and developing the infrastructure 75% funds was disbursed by the Central Government and 25% from the State Government. The construction was to be done by the Department of Sports and Department of Public works, both the departments were held by the high-ups of the State of Jharkhand, which had finalized the tender and the work was allotted to two companies namely, M/s Nagarjuna Company Ltd. and M/s. Lang Simplex. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that three times the cost of the project was revised initially i.e., from Rs.206 crores then Rs.340 crores and finally Rs.424 crores. The matter was raised in Jharkhand Assembly about the finalization of the name of the Consultant and for enhancement of cost of the project. The Jharkhand Assembly constituted a committee and finally the committee found that during the course of enquiry, large scale bungling was done and fraud was committed on various aspects in the construction of project:- (a) Entire cost has been enhanced as per the international sports activities and infrastructure seen by the Minister and his Personal Assistant respondent no.12. (b) The company called M/s Lang Simplex had entered into an agreement with M/s Lang but it was only on paper whereas Lang was a Leader Partner. (c) The appointment of consultant was the moot question before Vidhan Sabha Committee and there were so many question which were to be answered by the then Secretary of the Sports Department satisfactorily but those were never answered. Therefore, the committee recommended for investigation by an independent agency. (d) The main contractor M/s. Nagarjuna has been selected although it stood second as per the direction of the then Minister respondent no.11 for reason best known to him, various reasonable favour have been extended to this company by the respondent 11 which is evident from the recommendation of the Vidhan Sabha Committee. (d) The main contractor M/s. Nagarjuna has been selected although it stood second as per the direction of the then Minister respondent no.11 for reason best known to him, various reasonable favour have been extended to this company by the respondent 11 which is evident from the recommendation of the Vidhan Sabha Committee. (e) The petitioner brought this illegality to the notice of the then advisor to the Hon‘ble Governor Mr. G. Krishnan who referred the matter to Chief Secretary and instructed him to bring to the notice of the then Hon‘ble Governor so that legal action can be initiated against the persons involved in the fraud and illegality in the construction of Mega Sports Complex. (f) The petitioner with all relevant documents including Vidhan Sabha Committee‘s report, has approached this Hon‘ble Court and the judicial orders, on 31 Jan 2014 passed by this Hon‘ble Court asking the investigating agency to complete the investigation within eight months, but, the govt. agency has no respect for order, has not completed the investigation.” It is the further case of the writ petitioner that the fact about commission of irregularities in the construction of Mega Sports Complex has also been pointed out by the office of Comptroller and Auditor General in various forms. It is the further grievance of the writ petitioner that in spite of recommendation made by the Vidhan Sabha Committee for conducting investigation with regard to the irregularity committed in finalization of tender as also enhancement of cost of the project from Rs.206 crores to Rs.340 crores and finally to Rs.424 crores and appointing the consultant by changing the terms and conditions but even in spite of the aforesaid recommendation of the Vidhan Sabha Committee for investigation by an independent agency, investigation has not been handed over to the Anti-Corruption Bureau (Vigilance) and, therefore, this writ petition has been filed. W.P.(S) No.1580 of 2019 6. The writ petition being W.P.(S) No.1580 of 2019 has also been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to hand over the investigation of Vigilance P.S. Case No.49/2010 registered under Section 420, 120B, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 109, 409, 406 of Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(c)(d) of P.C. Act, 1988 to the Central Bureau of Investigation as the investigation is not just, fair and proper. It is the grievance of the writ petitioner that although the F.I.R. has been registered in the year 2010 and the allegation of embezzlement of public money is there, but the investigation is very slow which is due to the reason that high-ups of the State of Jharkhand are involved in such embezzlement. It is the further grievance of the writ petitioner that in spite of the direction passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 dated 31.01.2014, wherein the Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 were directed to expedite the investigation of Vigilance Case No.49 of 2010 and complete the investigation at an early date, preferably within a period of eight months, but even after lapse of about eight years from the date of order dated 31.01.2014, the investigation has not yet been completed. According to the writ petitioner, the reason for non-completion of investigation even in spite of the direction passed by this Court in W.P.(PIL)7719 of 2012 is the high-ups of the State of Jharkhand who are holding the prime posts in the Government and are coming in the way, therefore, it is a fit case wherein the matter may be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation for its investigation. 7. Learned counsels appearing for the petitioners, in all the aforesaid Public Interest Litigations, have jointly submitted that the writ petitions have been occasioned to be filed by the writ petitioner on two grounds i.e., (i) Even after the recommendation made by the Vidhan Sabha Committee to investigate the irregularity committed in construction of Mega Sports Complex by the Vigilance Bureau/Anti-Corruption Bureau, no such investigation has been handed over to Vigilance Bureau/Anti-Corruption Bureau or no police case has been instituted for conducting investigation. (ii) The irregularity committed in the matter of purchase of equipments as also the sports articles, although has been handed over to the Anti-Corruption Bureau but as yet the investigation has not been completed even though there is specific direction passed by tis Court in W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 to complete the investigation preferably within a period of eight months. (ii) The irregularity committed in the matter of purchase of equipments as also the sports articles, although has been handed over to the Anti-Corruption Bureau but as yet the investigation has not been completed even though there is specific direction passed by tis Court in W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 to complete the investigation preferably within a period of eight months. Learned counsel for the petitioners, thus, has submitted that the reason is obvious in not handing over the investigation to the special agency or even not instituting F.I.R. for commission of irregularity in the construction of Mega Sports Complex though on the basis of the discussion on the floor of the Assembly a committee was constituted wherein due recommendation was made to get the investigation done by the special agency Vigilance Bureau as is then was, now Anti-Corruption Bureau. Such recommendation was made also on the basis of the irregularity pointed out in the audit conducted by the Comptroller and Auditor General. Further, although the investigation has been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau pertaining to purchase of equipments and sports materials and to that effect an F.I.R. has been instituted in the year 2010 being Vigilance Case No.49 of 2010 but as yet the investigation has not been completed even though there was a direction of this Hon‘ble Court to complete the investigation preferably within a period of eight months. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the reason for non-completion of investigation even in spite of the direction passed by this Court is obvious since high-ups of the State functionary in the political side as also in the bureaucracy are involved and that is the reason the investigation has not been initiated so far as it relates to construction of Mega Sports Complex and the investigation has not been completed so far as it relates to purchase of equipments/sports materials. Learned counsel further submits that the involvement of the State authorities is very obvious as even after recommendation of the Vidhan Sabha Committee for handing over the investigation pertaining to commission of irregularity in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex, causing huge embezzlement of public money has not been handed over for its investigation to any agency. Therefore, these writ petitions have been filed. 8. Therefore, these writ petitions have been filed. 8. Learned Advocate General, appearing for the State of Jharkhand, has submitted by responding to the grounds agitated in all the three writ petitions to the effect that it is incorrect to say that the investigation is going very slowly, rather, much progress is there in the investigation. Referring to the subsequent charge-sheet submitted against Mr. R.K.Anand and others, submission has been made that charge-sheet has been submitted against altogether 07 accused persons and since 07 persons have already been sent up for trial, it is incorrect to say on the part of the writ petitioner that the investigation is slow. The issue of maintainability of the writ petitions has also been raised by agitating the ground that the writ petitioners have not come before this Court with clean hands and as such, the writ petitions are to be dismissed at the threshold on the this ground alone. Learned Advocate General has submitted that it is not a fit case where investigation is required to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation, reason being that the charge-sheet has been submitted against Mr. R.K. Anand upon whom the allegation is there in the writ petition that he is being shielded but the moment the charge-sheet has been submitted against Mr. R.K.Anand, the aforesaid allegation now does not exist and in view thereof, the matter is not required to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation. Further, the contention has been raised that the matter is not required to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation since investigation itself has been completed and once the investigation has been completed, it cannot be said that there is any dilly-dallying tactics on the part of the State authorities. Learned Advocate General, in support of his argument, has relied upon the following judgments :- (i) Secretary, Minor Irrigation & Rural Engineering Services, U.P. and Others v. Sahngoo Ram Arya and Another [ (2002) 5 SCC 521 ]. (ii) State of West Bengal and Others v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and Others [ (2010) 3 SCC 571 ]. (iii) T. C. Thangaraj v. V. Engammal and Others [ (2011) 12 SCC 328 ]. (iv) K. Saravanan Karuppasamy and Another v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others [ (2014) 10 SCC 406 ]. (ii) State of West Bengal and Others v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and Others [ (2010) 3 SCC 571 ]. (iii) T. C. Thangaraj v. V. Engammal and Others [ (2011) 12 SCC 328 ]. (iv) K. Saravanan Karuppasamy and Another v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others [ (2014) 10 SCC 406 ]. (v) Shree Shree Ram Janki Ji Asthan Tapovan Mandir and Another v. State of Jharkhand and Others [ (2019) 6 SCC 777 ]. 9. In response, learned counsel, appearing for the writ petitioners, have submitted that so far as it relates to maintainability of the writ petitions is concerned, the writ petitioners are raising the genuine cause of the people since it relates to huge embezzlement of public money in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex and purchase of sports articles. The State respondents have accepted the alleged irregularity committed therein since it is now the case of the State that charge-sheet has also been submitted against some of the accused persons and investigation is going on so far as it relates to purchase of sports articles is concerned and once the State is in agreement with the contention raised by the writ petitioners in these writ petitions, the issue of maintainability is not worth to be considered. Further, the State, although has filed an affidavit before this Court on 02.09.2013 in W.P.(PIL) No. 7719 of 2012 stating therein that the investigation pertaining to construction of Mega Sports Complex has been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau (now Anti-corruption Bureau), but such investigation has never been directed to be conducted by any investigating agency and in that view of the matter, raising the issue of maintainability is not worth consideration. Further, the investigation is not going on in the right perspective, reason being that the investigation pertaining to commission of irregularity in the matter of Mega Sports Complex ought to have been handed over to the agency for its investigation in order to surface the irregularity committed in the matter of embezzlement of public money and further, the investigation ought to have been completed as per the direction of this Court dated 31.01.2014 passed in W.P.(PIL) No. 7719 of 2012 to complete the investigation preferably within a period of eight months but as yet, even after lapse of about 12 years from the date of institution of F.I.R., the investigation has not been completed. It has been submitted that it is incorrect on the part of the State to take the ground that once the charge-sheet has been submitted against some of the accused persons, the matter cannot be handed over to independent agency, i.e., Central Bureau of Investigation, rather, according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, that this Court has got ample power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India if it appears to the Court that the investigation is not going in right perspective and there is involvement of the high-ups of the State, both in the political side and in the bureaucracy, then the matter can well be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation. According to the learned counsel, it is a fit case wherein investigation is being continued for last 12 years so far as purchase of equipments and sports material are concerned and further, the irregularity pertaining to the Mega Sports Complex since has not been handed over for its investigation, the intention of the State is very clear that they do not want a proper investigation in the matter, reason is obvious that high-ups of the State are involved therein. Learned counsel has relied upon the judgments rendered by Hon‘ble Apex Court in Rubabbuddin Sheikh v. State of Gujarat and Others [ (2010) 2 SCC 200 ] as also in State of West Bengal and Others v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and Others [ (2010) 3 SCC 571 ]. 10. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the documents available on record as also the judgments relied upon on behalf of respective parties. 11. 10. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the documents available on record as also the judgments relied upon on behalf of respective parties. 11. It appears from the material available on record, more particularly, Annexure-8, appended to the writ petition W.P.(PIL) No.1580 of 2019, that 34th National Games was decided to be organized in the State of Jharkhand and for the said purpose, a Memorandum of Association was signed with an object to prepare for and organize the 34th National Games, Ranchi as allotted by Indian Olympic Association to Jharkhand Olympic Association at the Annual General Body Meeting of Indian Olympic Association held on 11th January, 2003 at New Delhi to be organized with the support of Government of Jharkhand. The aforesaid Memorandum of Association stipulates a condition as under Condition No.2(l) wherein the main function of the Organizing Committee was to advice the Government regarding procurement of quality equipments and in any other matter according to Host City Contract for conduct of National Games on the advice of Indian Olympic Association, GTCC and the National Sports Federation whose events will be organized during 34th National Games, Ranchi, Jamshedpur and Dhanbad. It further appears from the aforesaid Memorandum of Association that the Executive Board has also been constituted which consists of eight persons namely:- Sl. No. Name of the Member Address of the Member Occupation Designation in the Society 1 Sri Madhu Koda Chief Minister, Govt. of Jharkhand Chairman 2 Sri R.K.Anand Ex. MP(RS), Sr. Advocate & President IOA Working Chairman 3 Sri Bandhu Tirkey Sports Minister Senior Vice Chairman 4 Sri A.K.Basu Chief Secretary, Jharkhand Vice Chairman 5 Sri S.M. Hashmi Secretary General, JOA Organising Secretary (I) 6 Sri R.S.Verma Secretary Sports Organising Secretary II (Infrastructure) 7 Sri M.K. Pathak Treasurer, JOA Treasurer 8 Sri P.C. Mishra Director, Dept. of Sports Director It appears from Annexure-7 to the writ petition that the meeting of Executive Board of National Games Organizing Committee was held on 21.11.2008 at NGOC Secretariat, Morabadi, Ranchi under the Chairmanship of Sri Shibu Soren, Chairman, NGOC and Hon‘ble Chief Minister, Jharkhand. It appears from the same that the members who have participated in the meeting for organizing the 34th National Games were Sri R.K.Anand, Ex MP, Working Chairman, NGOC, Sri Bandhu Tirkey, Sr. It appears from the same that the members who have participated in the meeting for organizing the 34th National Games were Sri R.K.Anand, Ex MP, Working Chairman, NGOC, Sri Bandhu Tirkey, Sr. Vice Chairman, NGOC and Minister of Sports, Sri S.M. Hashmi, Organising Secretary-I, NGOC, Sri R.S.Verma, Organising Secretary-II, NGOC, Sri P.C. Mishra, Director, NGOC, Sri M.K.Pathak, Treasurer, NGOC and Smt. Shilpi Saxena, Executive Board Member, NGOC. It further appears from Notification dated 19.04.2008, appended as Annexure-9 to the writ petition, that for the purpose of purchase of important materials, decision was taken to purchase it by inviting tender and for that purpose, a Special Committee was constituted on 25.02.2008 but subsequent thereto, the same was again reconstituted vide Notification dated 19.04.2008 consisting of the following functionaries :- 1. Secretary, Department of Culture, Sports and Youth Affairs – President 2. Director, Department of Culture, Sports and Youth Affairs – Member 3. Representative of Finance Department – Member 4. Representative of Vigilance Department – Member 5. Representative of Industry Department – member 6. Organizing Secretary-I, NGOC – Member 7. Incharge Officer of SAI, Ranchi – Member 8. Treasurer, NGOC - Member Admittedly, the 34th National Games has been decided to be organized by the State of Jharkhand with the collaboration of the Indian Olympic Association and Jharkhand Olympic Association. It is also evident from the record, more particularly, the pleading of the writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018, that for the purpose of convening the aforesaid National Games, a Mega Sports Complex was also decided to be constructed and accordingly, constructed. The games were held, but subsequent thereto, the issue of embezzlement of public money was raised which led to institution of F.I.R. being Vigilance Case No.49 of 2010 against the organizers of the 34th National Games. The games were held, but subsequent thereto, the issue of embezzlement of public money was raised which led to institution of F.I.R. being Vigilance Case No.49 of 2010 against the organizers of the 34th National Games. It requires to refer herein that after conclusion of the 34th National Games, the office of the Accountant General, Jharkhand conducted audit and pointed out financial irregularities as per the Audit Report contained in Memo No.IR No.OAD-Nc-241/2009-10 to the tune of Rs.28,38,09,000/- in conducting the 34th National Games, as would appear from the document appended in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State on 09.01.2019 as under Annexure-A. For ready reference, the extract of relevant paragraph is referred hereinbelow :- “That the Audit Report of Accountant General, Jharkhand, Ranchi vide Memo No.IR No.OAD-Nc-241/2009-10 had also pointed financial irregularities to the tune of Rs.28,38,09,000/- (Twenty eight crores thirty eight lakhs nine thousand) in conducting the 34th National Games.” It appears from the documents appended with the interlocutory application being I.A. No.1948 of 2022 filed in W.P.(PIL) No.7176 of 2017 that on 30.11.2019 charge-sheet has been submitted against Bandhu Tirkey and R.K.Anand and still the investigation is going on. It further appears that the Chairman of the Organizing Committee, during the relevant time, was Mr. Shibu Soren, as also he was Chief Minister of the State of Jharkhand. The names of the high-ups of the Police administration and the bureaucrats have also surfaced along with the Ministers concerned. The investigation has not proceeded in the right direction, rather, the dilly-dallying tactics was there and, therefore, a Public Interest Litigation was filed being W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 wherein the Division Bench of this Court passed order on 31.01.2014 wherein at paragraph 8 specific direction was passed for conclusion of investigation pertaining to Vigilance Case No.49 of 2010 at an early date, preferably within a period of eight months. The writ petitioner of W.P.(PIL) No. 5788 of 2018 had earlier approached this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 wherein, this Court has directed the Vigilance Bureau (now Anti-Corruption Bureau) to complete the investigation in the construction of Mega Sports Complex also, but very surprisingly, although investigation pertaining to purchase of sports equipments has been directed to be investigated by instituting Vigilance Case No.49/2010, but so far as the construction of Mega Sports Complex is concerned, no such investigation has been directed to be conducted either by the State Police or by the Vigilance Bureau (now Anti-Corruption Bureau). It further appears from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Sports Department on 02.09.2013 and 17.09.2013, that the stand taken therein are contradictory to each other as one affidavit speaks about the fact that investigation pertaining to commission of irregularities in the construction of Mega Sports Complex has been handed over to then Vigilance Bureau whereas the other affidavit speaks that the investigation pertaining to the said irregularity has not been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau (now Anti-Corruption Bureau). Such direction was given by this Court taking into consideration the fact that the State Government and the Central Government had given enough fund to the State of Jharkhand so that an infrastructure can be developed in the city of Ranchi, Dhanbad and Jamshedpur so that the games can be conducted successfully. It further appears that for Mega Sports Complex a meeting was held under the Chairmanship of the then Chief Minister of Jharkhand on 16.01.2002 and developing the infrastructure 75% funds was disbursed by the Central Government and 25% from the State Government. The construction was to be done by the Department of Sports and Department of Public works, both the departments were held by the high-ups of the State of Jharkhand, which had finalized the tender and the work was allotted to two companies namely, M/s Nagarjuna Company Ltd. and M/s. Lang Simplex. It also appears that three times the cost of the project was revised initially i.e., from Rs.206 crores then Rs.340 crores and finally Rs.424 crores. The matter was raised in Jharkhand Assembly about the finalization of the name of the Consultant and for enhancement of cost of the project. It also appears that three times the cost of the project was revised initially i.e., from Rs.206 crores then Rs.340 crores and finally Rs.424 crores. The matter was raised in Jharkhand Assembly about the finalization of the name of the Consultant and for enhancement of cost of the project. The Jharkhand Assembly constituted a committee and finally the committee found that during the course of enquiry, large scale bungling was done and fraud was committed on various aspects in the construction of project. No endeavour has been taken to get the matter investigated through any agency pertaining to embezzlement of public money in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex. 12. This Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and appreciating their rival submissions as also on perusal of relevant documents appended to the respective affidavits filed on behalf of the parties, is required to answer following issues :- (i) Whether these writ petitions are maintainable at the behest of the writ petitioners? (ii) Whether it is a fit case where the investigation is required to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation. Issue No.(i) 13. This Court, in order to answer the issue about maintainability, deems it fit and proper to refer certain judicial pronouncements of the Hon‘ble Apex Court. There is no dispute about the fact that a person who comes to the Court for relief in public interest, must come not only with the clean hands like any other writ petition but also with a clean heart, clean mind and clean objective, as has been propounded by the Hon‘ble Apex Court in Ramjas Foundation and Others v. Union of India and Others, [ AIR 1993 SC 852 ] (Para 7) and K. R. Srinivas v. R.M. Premchand and Others [ (1994) 6 SCC 620 ] (Para 7). It is necessary to take note of the meaning of expression 'public interest litigation'. It is necessary to take note of the meaning of expression 'public interest litigation'. In Strouds Judicial Dictionary, Volume 4 (IV Edition), 'Public Interest' is defined thus: "Public Interest (1) a matter of public or general interest does not mean that which is interesting as gratifying curiosity or a love of information or amusement but that in which a class of the community have a pecuniary interest, or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected." In Black's Law Dictionary (Sixth Edition), "public interest" is defined as follows : "Public Interest something in which the public, or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected. It does not mean anything the particular localities, which may be affected by the matters in question. Interest shared by national government...." In Janata Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary and Others, [ (1992) 4 SCC 305 ], the Hon‘ble Apex Court considered the scope of Public Interest Litigation and at para 52 of the said judgment. After considering what is ‘Public Interest’ it has been laid down as follows :- 52. In Black's Law Dictionary (6th edn.), ‘public interest’ is defined as follows: “Public Interest — Something in which the public, the community at large, has some pecuniary interest, or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected. It does not mean anything so narrow as mere curiosity, or as the interests of the particular localities, which may be affected by the matters in question. Interest shared by citizens generally in affairs of local, state or national government ….” At paragraph 53 the Hon‘ble Apex Court has defined the expression ‘litigation’ which is quoted hereunder:- “53. The expression ‘litigation‘ means a legal action including all proceedings therein, initiated in a court of law with the purpose of enforcing a right or seeking a remedy. Therefore, lexically the expression ‘PIL’ means a legal action initiated in a court of law for the enforcement of public interest or general interest in which the public or a class of the community have pecuniary interest or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected. Therefore, lexically the expression ‘PIL’ means a legal action initiated in a court of law for the enforcement of public interest or general interest in which the public or a class of the community have pecuniary interest or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected. There is a host of decisions explaining the expression ‘PIL’ in its wider connotation in the present day context in modern society, a few of which we will refer to in the appropriate part of this judgment.” At para 62 of the said judgment it was pointed out that “be that as it may, it is needless to emphasise that the requirement of locus standi of a party to a litigation is mandatory; because the legal capacity of the party to any litigation whether in private or public action in relation to any specific remedy sought for has to be primarily ascertained at the threshold.” At para 96 of the said judgment, it has further been observed that “while this Court has laid down a chain of notable decisions with all emphasis at their command about the importance and significance of this newly-developed doctrine of PIL, it has also hastened to sound a red alert and a note of severe warning that courts should not allow its process to be abused by a mere busybody or a meddlesome interloper or wayfarer or officious intervener without any interest or concern except for personal gain or private profit or other oblique consideration.” In subsequent paragraphs of the said judgment it has been held that “it is thus clear that only a person acting bona fide and having sufficient interest in the proceeding of PIL will alone have a locus standi and can approach the court to wipe out the tears of the poor and needy, suffering from violation of their fundamental rights, but not a person for personal gain or private profit or political motive or any oblique consideration. Similarly, a vexatious petition under the colour of PIL brought before the court for vindicating any personal grievance, deserves rejection at the threshold”. Similarly, a vexatious petition under the colour of PIL brought before the court for vindicating any personal grievance, deserves rejection at the threshold”. It has further been propounded that the Public Interest Litigation is a weapon which has to be used with great care and circumspection and the judiciary has to be extremely careful to see that behind the beautiful veil of public interest, an ugly private malice, vested interest and/or publicity seeking is not lurking. It is to be used as an effective weapon in the armoury of law for delivering social justice to citizens. The attractive brand name of public interest litigation should not be used for suspicious products of mischief. It should be aimed at redressal of genuine public wrong or public injury and not be publicity oriented or founded on personal vendetta. As indicated above, Court must be careful to see that a body of persons or member of public, who approaches the court is acting bona fide and not for personal gain or private motive or political motivation or other oblique consideration. The Court must not allow its process to be abused for oblique considerations by masked phantoms who monitor at times from behind. Some persons with vested interest indulge in the past time of meddling with judicial process either by force of habit or from improper motives and try to bargain for a good deal as well to enrich themselves. Often they are actuated by a desire to win notoriety or cheap popularity. The petitions of such busybodies deserve to be thrown out by rejection at the threshold, and in appropriate cases with exemplary costs. Therefore, the Court has to be satisfied about the credentials of the applicant; the prima facie correctness or nature of information given by him; and the information being not vague and indefinite. In Sujatha Ravi Kiran alias Sujatasahu v. State of Kerala and Others [ (2016) 7 SCC 597 ] the Hon‘ble Apex Court at paragraph 11 has laid down following propositions which read as under :- “11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in hand, in the light of the above principles, we are of the view that the case in hand does not entail a direction for transferring the investigation from the State police/special team of State police officers to CBI. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in hand, in the light of the above principles, we are of the view that the case in hand does not entail a direction for transferring the investigation from the State police/special team of State police officers to CBI. The facts and circumstances in which the offence is alleged to have been committed can be better investigated into by the State police. However, having regard to the nature of allegations levelled by the petitioner, we deem it appropriate to direct the State of Kerala to constitute a special team of police officers headed by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police to investigate the matter.” In K.V. Rajendran v. Superintendent of Police, CBCID South Zone, Chennai and Others [ (2013) 12 SCC 480 ], it has been held that the Court could exercise its constitutional powers for transferring an investigation from the State investigating agency to any other independent investigating agency only in rare and exceptional cases. Such as where high officials of State authorities are involved, or the accusation itself is against the top officials of the investigating agency thereby allowing them to influence the investigation, and to instil confidence in the investigation. In Bimal Gurung v. Union of India and Others [ (2018) 15 SCC 480 ], the Hon‘ble Apex Court has held that the power of transferring such investigation must be in rare and exceptional cases where the court finds it necessary in order to do justice between the parties to instil confidence in the public mine. The relevant paragraph of the said judgment is quoted hereunder :- “29. The law is thus well settled that power of transferring investigation to other investigating agency must be exercised in rare and exceptional cases where the court finds it necessary in order to do justice between the parties to instil confidence in the public mind, or where investigation by the State Police lacks credibility. Such power has to be exercised in rare and exceptional cases. In K.V. Rajendran v. Supt. Such power has to be exercised in rare and exceptional cases. In K.V. Rajendran v. Supt. of Police, (2013) 12 SCC 480 , this Court has noted few circumstances where the Court could exercise its constitutional power to transfer of investigation from State Police to CBI such as : (i) where high officials of State authorities are involved, or (ii) where the accusation itself is against the top officials of the investigating agency thereby allowing them to influence the investigation, or (iii) where investigation prima facie is found to be tainted/biased.” In State of West Bengal and Others v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and Others (Supra), the Constitution Bench of Hon‘ble Apex Court has considered at length the power of High Court to direct investigation by Central Bureau of Investigation into a cognizable offence alleged to have been committed within the territorial jurisdiction of a State and while taking the view that the High Court has wide powers under Article 226 of the Constitution, cautioned that the Court must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations. Paragraph 70 of the said judgment is quoted hereunder :- “70. Before parting with the case, we deem it necessary to emphasise that despite wide powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these constitutional powers. The very plenitude of the power under the said articles requires great caution in its exercise. Insofar as the question of issuing a direction to CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations.” It is evident from the bare reading of the judicial pronouncements of the Hon‘ble Apex Court as referred hereinabove, that the Court could exercise its constitutional power for transferring any investigation from the State Investigating Agency to any other investigating agency only in rare and exceptional circumstances. Further, it appears that such power can be exercised by the Court when it is necessary in order to do justice between the parties and to instil confidence in the public mind. The credentials of the writ petitioner is also required to be seen in order to frustrate frivolous litigation which is filed in the garb of Public Interest Litigation. 14. This Court, on the basis of the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, is now proceeding to examine the objection raised about the maintainability of the writ petitions. The instant writ petition (W.P.(PIL) No. 7176 of 2017) has been filed by one Sushil Kumar Singh wherein the writ petitioner discloses himself to be citizen of India and is entitled to get protection and enforcement of rights guaranteed and envisaged in the Constitution of India. These writ petitions were filed in the year 2017, 2018 and 2019. It appears from the order dated 14.12.2018 passed in the instant writ petition (W.P.(PIL) No.7176 of 2017) that the State was directed to file response to the writ petition. Response was filed on behalf of the State on 09.01.2019, 25.03.2022 and 02.04.2022. We have perused the affidavits filed on behalf of the State respondent concerned and found therefrom that no stand has been taken about the maintainability of the writ petition, rather averment has been made that the trial is in progress. We have also found that there is no affidavit filed on behalf of the State in W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018 and W.P.(PIL) No.1580 of 2019. We have also found that there is no affidavit filed on behalf of the State in W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018 and W.P.(PIL) No.1580 of 2019. The question of raising the issue of maintainability has been raised orally but without any pleading. In the affidavit filed in W.P.(PIL) No. 7176 of 2017 the State has accepted the maintainability of the writ petition and that is the reason this Court has been apprised with the progress in the investigation. Further, the writ petitioner of W.P.(PIL) No. 5788 of 2018 had earlier filed another P.I.L., being W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012, record of which has been appended as Annexure-1, in the counter affidavit filed to the aforesaid P.I.L. (W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012) the issue of filing the P.I.L. by the writ petitioner has not been raised questioning the issue of maintainability, rather the Court has been apprised that the investigation has been decided to be handed over to the Vigilance Bureau pertaining to the construction of the Mega Sports Complex and further, so far as the irregularity committed in the matter of purchase of equipments/sports materials is concerned, the matter has been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau being Vigilance Case No.49/2010. Further, the writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012, which was filed on behalf of the writ petitioner of W.P.(PIL) No. 5788 of 2018, was disposed of by a Coordinate Division Bench of this Court wherein direction was sought for to order vigilance enquiry in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex. In that case also the issue of maintainability was raised. While dealing with the same, the Coordinate Division Bench of this Court had passed an order discarding the issue of maintainability on the ground of credentials of the writ petitioner and considering the stand of the State taken in the counter affidavit that the matter is being investigated by the Vigilance Bureau, direction was issued upon the concerned respondents to expedite and conclude the investigation of Vigilance Case No.49/2010. This Court, therefore, is of the view that the issue of credentials of the writ petitioner which is being raised on behalf of the respondents, is not worth to be considered at this stage, that too, when the State itself has handed over the investigation to the Vigilance Bureau and the State is now coming with the plea that the investigation is at the verge of completion, meaning thereby, whatever fact has been brought to the notice of this Court by way of these three writ petitions, the same cannot be said to be based upon malice and the petitions cannot be said to have been filed with ulterior motive since it is the State which has handed over the investigation to the Vigilance Bureau so far as it relates to purchase of equipments/sports materials. Once the State has accepted the stand of the writ petitioner and has apprised this Court about the investigation having been conducted, it is not available to the State to raise the issue of maintainability on the ground of credentials of the writ petitioner. More so, on earlier occasion also, a Coordinate Division Bench of this Court has passed order on 31.01.2014 in W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 directing the concerned respondents to conclude the investigation of Vigilance Case No.49/2010 preferably within a period of eight months. The question of credentials of the writ petitioner can only be allowed to be raised when the State is doubting with respect to the averments on which the writ petition has been filed. In the case in hand, no doubt has been expressed, rather, the ground which has been raised for conducting investigation has been admitted by the State and that is the reason this Court has been apprised that the matter has been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau, now Anti-Corruption Bureau. The investigation is going on as also the charge-sheets have been submitted against some of the accused persons, meaning thereby, the State is also of the view that irregularity has been committed and that is the reason charge-sheet against some of the accused persons has been submitted. Further, even the matter has been discussed in the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly and after detailed discussion, a committee has been constituted i.e., Vidhan Sabha Committee. Further, even the matter has been discussed in the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly and after detailed discussion, a committee has been constituted i.e., Vidhan Sabha Committee. The Vidhan Sabha Committee made recommendation to constitute a High Level Committee and pursuant thereto, a High Level Committee was constituted under the Chairmanship of the Development Commissioner and thereafter the matter was handed over to the Vigilance Bureau for investigation so far as it relates to purchase of equipments/sports material and, therefore, the writ petitioner cannot be thrown out on the ground of lack of credentials since the State is not disputing the allegation, rather, the decision has been taken to hand over the investigation to the investigating agency. This Court, therefore, on the basis of the discussion made hereinabove, is of the view that the issue of maintainability of these writ petitions filed by way of public interest litigation, on the ground of lack of credentials of the writ petitioners, is not worth to be considered and accordingly, the same is rejected. Accordingly, Issue No.(i) is answered. Issue No.(ii) 15. This Court, after holding the writ petitions to be maintainable, is now required to answer as to whether it is a fit case where the matter is required to be handed over to the independent agency i.e., Central Bureau of Investigation. It is not in dispute that the Hon‘ble Apex Court, in the judgments referred hereinabove, has propounded the proposition of law to hand over the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation though with utmost care but simultaneously it has been held that in order to maintain confidence of the people and to secure the interest of the people at large, the constitutional court is competent enough to hand over the investigation to Central Bureau of Investigation. Learned Advocate General, appearing for the State of Jharkhand, has vehemently submitted that since the charge-sheet has been submitted against some of the accused persons and the investigation is likely to be concluded very soon, as such, it cannot a fit case to hand over the investigation to an independent agency i.e., Central Bureau of Investigation. We are not in agreement with such argument/submission, reason being that admittedly the F.I.R. has been instituted in the year 2010 so far as it relates to purchase of sports articles are concerned. We are not in agreement with such argument/submission, reason being that admittedly the F.I.R. has been instituted in the year 2010 so far as it relates to purchase of sports articles are concerned. The investigation has continued for a period of 12 years and is still continuing even though there is specific direction of this Court to conclude the investigation preferably within the period of eight months. It is not in dispute so far as legal position is concerned that if any investigation is set at motion on institution of criminal case, as per the procedure laid down under the Cr.P.C., it has to be concluded at an early date and if the investigation has been dragged fairly for a long period to extend benefit to the person(s) who are involved in the crime, the concerned, who are involved in dragging the investigation to aid such persons, are equally responsible for extending the illegal relief to such persons who are involved in the crime. Admittedly the bureaucrats, both police as well as the administration, during the relevant time, are required to be questioned as to why the investigation has dragged for a period of 12 years. Further, the investigation pertaining to the construction of Mega Sports Complex is admittedly has not been handed over to any agency, which also suggests the possibility that due to involvement of high-ups, such benefit has been extended to the persons concerned who are involved in the crime. In view thereof, the argument which has been advanced on behalf of the State in this regard, is not worth consideration. However, the question of handing over the investigation to independent agency, like Central Bureau of Investigation, after submission of charge-sheet fell for consideration before the Hon‘ble Apex Court in Rubabbuddin Sheikh v. State of Gujarat and Others (Supra), wherein the Hon‘ble Apex Court has been pleased to hold that investigation can be handed over to Central Bureau of Investigation even after submission of charge-sheet and commencement of trial. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment is paragraphs, 51, 52, 53, 54, 60 and 61 which are being quoted hereunder :- 51. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment is paragraphs, 51, 52, 53, 54, 60 and 61 which are being quoted hereunder :- 51. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the parties and after going through the eight action taken reports submitted by the police authorities before this Court and after considering the decisions of this Court cited at the Bar and the materials on record and considering the nature of offence sought to be investigated by the State police authorities who are themselves involved in such crime, we are unable to accept that the investigation at this stage cannot be handed over to the CBI Authorities or any other independent agency. We have already discussed the decisions cited by Mr Mukul Rohatgi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State of Gujarat and have already distinguished the said cases and came to a conclusion that those decisions were rendered when CBI enquiries have already been made and at that stage this Court held that after the charge-sheet is submitted, the CBI Authorities would not be able to approach this Court or the High Court to have issuance of directions from this Court. 52. In R.S. Sodhi v. State of U.P. [1994 Supp (1) SCC 143] on which reliance was placed by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, this Court observed: (SCC pp. 144-45, para 2) “2. … We have perused the events that have taken place since the incidents but we are refraining from entering upon the details thereof lest it may prejudice any party but we think that since the accusations are directed against the local police personnel it would be desirable to entrust the investigation to an independent agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation so that all concerned including the relatives of the deceased may feel assured that an independent agency is looking into the matter and that would lend the final outcome of the investigation credibility. However faithfully the local police may carry out the investigation, the same will lack credibility since the allegations are against them. It is only with that in mind that we having thought it both advisable and desirable as well as in the interest of justice to entrust the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation….? However faithfully the local police may carry out the investigation, the same will lack credibility since the allegations are against them. It is only with that in mind that we having thought it both advisable and desirable as well as in the interest of justice to entrust the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation….? (emphasis supplied) This decision clearly helps the writ petitioner for handing over the investigation to the CBI Authorities or any other independent agency. 53. It is an admitted position in the present case that the accusations are directed against the local police personnel in which the high police officials of the State of Gujarat have been made the accused. Therefore, it would be proper for the writ petitioner or even the public to come forward to say that if the investigation carried out by the police personnel of the State of Gujarat is done, the writ petitioner and their family members would be highly prejudiced and the investigation would also not come to an end with proper finding and if investigation is allowed to be carried out by the local police authorities, we feel that all concerned including the relatives of the deceased may feel that investigation was not proper and in that circumstances it would be fit and proper that the writ petitioner and the relatives of the deceased should be assured that an independent agency should look into the matter and that would lend the final outcome of the investigation credibility however faithfully the local police may carry out the investigation, particularly when the gross allegations have been made against the high police officials of the State of Gujarat and for which some high police officials have already been taken into custody. 54. It is also well known that when police officials of the State were involved in the crime and in fact they are investigating the case, it would be proper and interest of justice would be better served if the investigation is directed to be carried out by the CBI Authorities, in that case CBI Authorities would be an appropriate authority to investigate the case. 60. 60. Therefore, in view of our discussions made hereinabove, it is difficult to accept the contentions of Mr Rohatgi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State of Gujarat that after the charge-sheet is submitted in the court in the criminal proceeding it was not open for this Court or even for the High Court to direct investigation of the case to be handed over to CBI or to any independent agency. Therefore, it can safely be concluded that in an appropriate case when the court feels that the investigation by the police authorities is not in the proper direction and in order to do complete justice in the case and as the high police officials are involved in the said crime, it was always open to the court to hand over the investigation to the independent agency like CBI. It cannot be said that after the charge-sheet is submitted, the court is not empowered, in an appropriate case, to hand over the investigation to an independent agency like CBI. 61. Keeping this discussion in mind, that is to say, in an appropriate case, the court is empowered to hand over the investigation to an independent agency like CBI even when the charge-sheet has been submitted, we now deal with the facts of this case whether such investigation should be transferred to the CBI Authorities or any other independent agency in spite of the fact that the charge-sheet has been submitted in court. On this ground, we have carefully examined the eight action taken reports submitted by the State police authorities before us and also the various materials produced and the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties.” It is evident from perusal of the aforesaid judgment wherein the Hon‘ble Apex Court on not being satisfied with the investigation, after going through the charge-sheet, has considered the case fit to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation and accordingly, the investigation was handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation. 16. Admittedly, as per the material available on record and more particularly, the reflection which is being made from the order dated 31.01.2014 passed in W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012, is that there was irregularity in construction of Mega Sports complex which is the subject matter of the writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018 and for which writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 was filed. In that case counter affidavit was filed by the respondent State which has been appended as Annexure-1 to W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018. A stand inter alia was taken by the State making reference of commission of irregularity in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex and levelling allegation of three times increase in the cost of the project i.e., the cost has been increased to Rs.206 crores, then Rs.340 crores and finally Rs.424 crores. The aforesaid matter was raised in the Jharkhand Assembly specially about finalization of consultant and enhancement of the cost of the project. The Jharkhand Assembly constituted a committee and finally the committee found during the course of enquiry that large scale bungling was done and fraud was committed on various aspects in the construction of project as would appear from paragraph 2 of W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018, in which the statement made has not been rebutted, since no counter affidavit has been filed. Same is summarised as under:- (a) The cost has been enhanced as per the international sports activities and infrastructure seen by the Minister and his Personal Assistant. (b) The company called M/s Lang Simplex had entered into an agreement with M/s Lang but it was only on paper whereas Lang was a Leader Partner. (c) The appointment of consultant was the moot question before Vidhan Sabha Committee and there were so many question which was to be answered by the then Secretary of the Sports Department satisfactorily but that has not been answered. Therefore, the committee recommended for investigation by an independent agency. (d) The main contractor M/s. Nagarjuna has been selected although it stood second as per the direction of the then Minister for reason best known to him, various reasonable favour have been extended to this company which is evident from the recommendation of the Vidhan Sabha Committee. (e) The petitioner brought this illegality to the notice of the then advisor to the Hon‘ble Governor Mr. G. Krishnan who referred the matter to Chief Secretary and instructed him to bring to the notice of the then Hon‘ble Governor so that legal action can be initiated against the persons involved in the fraud and illegality in the construction of Mega Sports Complex. G. Krishnan who referred the matter to Chief Secretary and instructed him to bring to the notice of the then Hon‘ble Governor so that legal action can be initiated against the persons involved in the fraud and illegality in the construction of Mega Sports Complex. (f) The petitioner with all relevant documents including Vidhan Sabha Committee‘s report, has approached this Hon‘ble Court and the judicial orders, on 31 Jan 2014 passed by this Hon‘ble Court asking the investigating agency to complete the investigation within eight months, but, the govt. agency has no respect for order, has not completed the investigation. The Vidhan Sabha Committee recommended for investigation by an independent agency i.e. by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (Vigilance) or Central Bureau of Investigation because the Anti-Corruption Bureau is under the State Government but the respondent State of Jharkhand did not follow the aforesaid recommendation and, therefore, the writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 was filed. In the counter affidavit dated 02.09.2013, sworn by Chandra Mohan Prasad Kashyap, who was holding the post of Deputy Secretary, Art, Culture, Sports and Youth Affairs Department, Jharkhand, as under Annexure-1 to W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018, wherein the State took the pleat at paragraph 27 which is very peculiar, reason being that every aspect of the matter i.e., recommendation made by the Vidhan Sabha Committee to hand over the investigation to the Vigilance Bureau (now Anti-Corruption Bureau) and the State has admitted at paragraph 17 of the aforesaid counter affidavit by making a statement that the Government is duty bound to implement the recommendation of Vidhan Sabha Committee. Further, it has been stated in the said paragraph that the matter was handed over to the Vigilance Bureau for detailed investigation of the matter. For ready reference, paragraph 17 of the counter affidavit (Annexure-1) is being referred hereunder :- “17. That in reply to para 3 it is stated that the Govt. is duty bound to implement the recommendation of Vidhan Sabha Committee and on the direction of Hon‘ble Court, the matter was handed over to the Vigilance Bureau for detailed investigation of the matter.” Further, from the statement made at paragraph 19 of the aforesaid counter affidavit, it is evident that the Government has already handed over the investigation to the Vigilance Bureau and all records have been made available to the Bureau. At paragraph 35 it has been stated that the investigation has already been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau and direction has been given to conclude the investigation at the earliest. At paragraph 39, it has been stated that the matter pertaining to finalization of the tender, consultant etc. in the construction of the Mega Sports Complex has already been handed over to the Vigilance. For ready reference paragraph 39 is being quoted hereunder :- “39. That in reply to para 15 it is stated that the matter has already been handed to the vigilance bureau for detailed investigation in the finalization of the tender, consultant etc in the construction of the Mega Sports Complex.” This Court has found from the another affidavit filed on 17.09.2013, as has been appended as Annexure-1/A in W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018, sworn by Ram Nandan Sharma, who was holding the post of Deputy superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Jharkhand wherein at paragraph 5 it has been stated that no such petition has been received by the answering respondent and the answering respondent is not conducting any investigation save and except Vigilance Case No.49/2010 which relates to purchase of sports articles in National Games, 2010. The aforesaid paragraph is quoted hereunder :- “5. That it is humbly stated and submitted that no such petition has been received by the answering respondent and the answering respondent is not conducting any investigation save and except Vigilance Case No.49/2010, which relates to purchase of sports articles in National Games, 2010.” 17. This Court has found that at the one hand the State has filed an affidavit through Deputy Secretary, Art, Culture, Sports and Youth Affairs Department, Jharkhand, as under Annexure-1 to W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018, apprising the Court regarding the matter pertaining to construction of Mega Sports Complex having been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau on the basis of the recommendation of the Vidhan Sabha Committee but very surprisingly, on the other hand the Deputy superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Jharkhand, in its affidavit dated 17.09.2013, as under Annexure-1/A to W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018, has stated that no such application has been received in the office of the Vigilance Bureau to investigate about the irregularities committed in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex, save and except Vigilance Case No.49/2010 which relates to purchase of sports articles. Therefore, it prima facie appears that the State authorities have misled this Court by giving incorrect statement about investigation of commission of irregularity in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex which has been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau, basis upon which this Court has passed order on 31.01.2014 in W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012, appended as Annexure-2 to W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018, accepting the statement of the State that the matter pertaining to construction of Mega Sports Complex has also been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau giving a picture that the Vigilance Case No.49/2010 also pertains to the same. This was the reason, the Coordinate Division Bench of this Court, while disposing of the writ petition, at paragraph 8 thereof, directed that investigation of Vigilance Case No.49/2010 be completed preferably within a period of eight months. It further appears from paragraph 1 of the aforesaid order wherein reference of prayer made in the aforesaid writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012, has been made which was filed to order vigilance enquiry in the construction of Mega Sports Complex, meaning thereby, a picture was projected before this Court that the matter of investigation pertaining to construction of Mega Sports Complex is also the subject matter of Vigilance Case No.49/2010. From the aforesaid fact it is very much clear that the stand of the State that Vigilance Case No.49/2010 has got nothing to do with the irregularity committed in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex, rather, the same pertains to the purchase of equipments/sports material only, as would appear from the averment made by the State in the affidavit filed on 09.01.2019, 25.03.2022 and 02.04.2022. Further, it is evident from paragraph-5 of the affidavit dated 17.09.2013 (Annexure-1/A to W.P.(PIL) No.5788 of 2018) that the matter pertaining to investigation of commission of irregularity in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex is not the subject matter of Vigilance Case No.49/2010. It further appears from the status report relating to Vigilance Case No.49/2010 corresponding to Special Case No.66/2010, appended as Annexure-A to the affidavit filed on behalf of the State respondent dated 09.01.2019 wherein Vigilance Case No.49/2010 has been said to be related to the irregularity committed in procurement of the sports goods for 34th National Games held at Ranchi. It further appears from the status report relating to Vigilance Case No.49/2010 corresponding to Special Case No.66/2010, appended as Annexure-A to the affidavit filed on behalf of the State respondent dated 09.01.2019 wherein Vigilance Case No.49/2010 has been said to be related to the irregularity committed in procurement of the sports goods for 34th National Games held at Ranchi. For ready reference, the very first paragraph of the said status report is being referred hereunder :- “That, this Vigilance P.S. case no.-49/10, dated – 06.10.10, u/s- 406/409/420/467/468/471/ 120(B)/109 I.P.C., & section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was registered on the basis of written complain of Sri Bhola Nath Singh S/O Yamuna Prasad Singh, R/O Near Phool Baba Ashram, Lake road, Ranchi against 1. Sri R.K.Anana, the then Working Chairman, 2. Sri Saiyed Matloob Hashmi, the then organizing Secretary, 3. Sri Prakash Chandra Mishra, the then Director, Department of Sports, Government of Jharkhand, 4. Sri Madhukant Pathak the then treasurer all officials of NGOC. The F.I.R. is related to the irregularities in Procurement of sports goods for 34th National Games held at Ranchi in the year 2011.” It further appears from the status report that the audit report of the Accountant General, Jharkhand, Ranchi had pointed out financial irregularities to the tune of Rs.28,38,09,000/- in conducting the 34th National Games. Thus, it is evident that the Vigilance Case No.49/2010 only pertains to commission of irregularities and embezzlement of public money in the matter of purchase of sports articles. It is clear that no investigation pertaining to embezzlement of public money in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex has ever been handed over for investigation by the Vigilance Bureau and, as such, the State authorities sitting in the helms of affairs as also political leaders who may be involved in the matter of organizing the 34th National Games, appears to have managed the things by not handing over the investigation to Vigilance Bureau in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex. Further, even the persons at the helms of affairs i.e., political as well as high-ups in the bureaucracy, have duped the Court by filing false affidavit regarding handing over the investigation pertaining to construction of Mega sports Complex to the Vigilance Bureau while the functionary of investigating agency itself has stated before this Court that no such investigation has been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau. 18. The second aspect of the matter that even the investigation of Vigilance Case No.49/2010, in spite of specific direction passed by this Court to complete the investigation preferably within the period of eight months, has not been completed, however, submission has been made on the basis of the statement made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State that the charge-sheet has been submitted against certain erring officials/persons, but the investigation is still going on. The question is that in a matter of embezzlement of public money for which F.I.R. was instituted sometime in the year 2010, investigation could not proceed properly, in consequence thereof, a writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.7719 of 2012 was filed and considering the delay in investigation as also considering the huge amount of embezzlement of public money, this Court had directed to conclude the investigation preferably within a period of eight months vide order dated 31.01.2014 but even after lapse of more than eight years from the date of passing of such order, the investigation is still going on. This Court is of the view that investigation in the criminal case cannot be allowed to be continued till eternity, rather, the investigation is required to be completed at an early date but in the case in hand, despite the order passed by this Court, investigation has not been completed, rather, it has been allowed to be continued and still it is continuing. This puts a serious question mark upon the investigating agency, the officials and all high-ups. It has been informed to this Court that the matter is being investigated pertaining to Vigilance Case No.49/2010 and a serious allegation has been levelled against one high police official who is now in the helms of affairs of the Anti-Corruption Bureau, being its head. It has further been informed to this Court that high bureaucrats now heading the Departments, were also part of that organizing committee and that is the reason the investigation is being delayed. 19. It has further been informed to this Court that high bureaucrats now heading the Departments, were also part of that organizing committee and that is the reason the investigation is being delayed. 19. This Court, at this juncture, deems it fit and proper to deal with the judgments upon which reliance has been placed by the learned Advocate General in support of his argument. (i) So far as the judgment rendered by the Hon‘ble Apex Court in Secretary, Minor Irrigation & Rural Engineering Services, U.P. and Others v. Sahngoo Ram Arya and Another [ (2002) 5 SCC 521 ] is concerned, it is evident from the said judgment that the proposition has been laid down that merely because a party made allegation against a person, High Court cannot direct CBI to investigate as to whether a person committed an offence, as alleged or not. This Court, on perusal of factual aspect involved therein, is of the view that on facts the judgment is not applicable, reason being that here the State itself is admitting that the public money has been embezzled and that is the reason Vigilance Case No.49/2010 has been instituted, in which the investigation is going on. Further, on the basis of the recommendation of Jharkhand Legislative Assembly, consideration has been made about embezzlement of public money in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex and to that effect an affidavit has also been filed that the matter has been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau but very surprisingly, no such endeavour has been made to hand over the investigation. Therefore, it is not a case where merely on the basis of allegation of a person the direction has been sought for to hand over the investigation to the CBI. Therefore, this judgment is not applicable in the facts of this case. (ii) So far as the judgment rendered in State of West Bengal and Others v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and Others [ (2010) 3 SCC 571 ] is concerned, this Court, on perusal of the said judgment is of the view that the said judgment has mainly considered the power of the High Court as to whether the investigation in a particular case can be handed over to the CBI in exercise of power conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Calcutta High Court, taking into consideration the fact that involvement of high police officials in the crime is there, therefore, handed over the matter to the CBI and the Hon‘ble Apex Court, on consideration of the constitutional provision about basic structure of the Constitution of India, has approved the view of the Calcutta High Court. Herein also, on perusal of the documents available on record and as per the discussion made hereinabove, there is involvement of high-ups of the Police Administration as also the bureaucrats as well as the political leaders, therefore, applying the principle laid down in the judgment rendered in State of West Bengal and Others v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and Others (Supra), it is a fit case where the matter is required to be handed over to the CBI. (iii) So far as the judgments rendered in T.C. Thangaraj v. V. Engammal and Others [ (2011) 12 SCC 328 ] and in K. Saravanan Karuppasamy and Another v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others [ (2014) 10 SCC 406 ] are concerned, the proposition has been laid down that the High Court, in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is required to exercise such power only sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations. There is no dispute that each and every case cannot be handed over to the CBI by the High Court, rather, such power can only be exercised only sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations. This Court, on the basis of the discussion made hereinabove and more particularly filing incorrect affidavit before this Court about investigation being handed over to the Vigilance Bureau pertaining to construction of Mega Sports Complex and continuation of investigation pertaining to purchase of sports articles for the last 12 years, is of the view that it is a case where, on facts, exceptional situation has been created due to involvement of the high-ups of the State taking into consideration the huge embezzlement of public money, therefore, applying the principle laid down in the aforesaid judgment, this Court deems it fit and proper to hand over the investigation to the CBI. (iv) So far as the judgment rendered in Shree Shree Ram Janki Ji Asthan Tapovan Mandir and Another v. State of Jharkhand and Others [ (2019) 6 SCC 777 ] is concerned, this Court after going through the factual aspect, has found therefrom that the matter pertains to the rights of the Trustees to sell properties of a religious trust or deity, which gives rise to the civil dispute. But, herein, such is not the fact, rather, it involves huge public money, therefore, on facts this judgment is not applicable. 20. The investigation has not been carried out with respect to commission of irregularity pertaining to construction of Mega Sports Complex even in spite of recommendation of the Vidhan Sabha Committee, rather false affidavit has been filed before this Court that the matter pertaining to embezzlement of public money in the matter of construction of Mega Sports Complex has been handed over to the Vigilance Bureau and the fact that the Vigilance Bureau has apprised this Court by way of an affidavit that no such investigation has been handed over to it. Further, even where the investigation has been handed over pertaining to purchase of equipments/sports material being Vigilance Case No.49/2010, the investigation is continuing for last 12 years. The record suggest that the committee which was constituted for organizing the 34th National Games, was headed by the then Chief Minister, who is father of the present Chief Minister and it would also appear from the list of the committees wherein most of the bureaucrats are now at the highest level of the Government heading the departments. Therefore, will it not be proper for this Court, in such a situation, to hand over the investigation to Central Bureau of Investigation in order to maintain the faith of the people and to secure the social justice since there is involvement of huge amount of public money and the charge-sheet has also been submitted against some of the accused persons pertaining to purchase of sports material? This Court, therefore, applying the principle laid down by the Hon‘ble Apex Court in Rubabbuddin Sheikh v. State of Gujarat and Others (Supra), Bimal Gurung v. Union of India and Others (Supra) and State of West Bengal and Others v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and Others (Supra), is of the view that it is a fit case where the matter is required to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation even in spite of the fact that charge-sheet against some of the accused persons has been submitted but investigation is still going on. It is also a fit case to hand over the investigation to Central Bureau of Investigation, reason being that the suppliers/contractors are shown to have their offices outside the territory and jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand and it is not possible for the State Police, even the Anti-Corruption Bureau, to conduct investigation, properly, with respect to the erring persons or the contractors or the suppliers who are living outside the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand unless the investigation will be conducted by an independent agency like Central Bureau of Investigation who is having authority to investigation even outside the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand. Thus, on the basis of the discussion made hereinabove as also considering the proposition laid down by the Hon‘ble Apex Court in the judgments referred hereinabove, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit case where the investigation of the matter pertaining to construction of Mega Sports Complex as also purchase of equipments/sports articles is required to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation. Issue No.(ii) is answered accordingly. 21. Accordingly, following directions are being passed :- (i) The matter pertaining to irregularity committed in the construction of Mega Sports Complex, constructed to organize the 34th National Games, be investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation. (ii) The investigation pertaining to Vigilance Case No.49/2010 is directed to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation. The Anti-Corruption Bureau of the State of Jharkhand is directed to hand over the entire documents to the Central Bureau of Investigation forthwith. (ii) The investigation pertaining to Vigilance Case No.49/2010 is directed to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation. The Anti-Corruption Bureau of the State of Jharkhand is directed to hand over the entire documents to the Central Bureau of Investigation forthwith. (iii) The Central Bureau of Investigation is further directed to surface the complicity of the administrative authorities as also the Police Officials and others who are found to be coming in the way of early conclusion of the investigation of the case in order to surface the culpability of the accused persons in delaying the investigation for a period of more than 12 years. Such direction is being passed taking into consideration the fact that in a criminal case if there is any interference in the proper investigation of the crime, the concerned who are coming in the way of proper investigation, is also required to be dealt with. (iv) The State of Jharkhand, through different departments in the helms of affairs of the sports, is directed to coordinate with the Central Bureau of Investigation by handing over the documents pertaining to construction of Mega Sports Complex, constructed to organize the 34th National Games, forthwith. (v) The Central Bureau of Investigation would be at liberty to move an application before this Court in case of non-cooperation from the State Government on any count. 22. Accordingly, the instant writ petitions stand disposed of with the direction as above. 23. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.