Is a Preliminary Enquiry Mandatory Before a Corruption FIR? The Thommandru Rule

CBI v. Thommandru Hannah Vijayalakshmi, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 923, clarified that a preliminary enquiry is not an inflexible precondition to every corruption FIR. Where information already discloses a cognizable offence, failure to conduct a separate enquiry does not by itself invalidate registration.

Purpose of preliminary enquiry

A preliminary enquiry may help determine whether information reveals a cognizable offence. It is not a mini-trial or an opportunity for the suspected public servant to explain every asset before an FIR. The investigative agency must follow governing manuals and law, but internal procedure cannot erase the statutory duty to register a disclosed cognizable offence.

Disproportionate-assets cases

In a disproportionate-assets case, the source report may contain the relevant check period, known income, expenditure and assets. If that information supplies a prima facie basis, registration can proceed. Whether calculations are ultimately correct is tested through investigation and trial.

Current procedure

Thommandru arose under the CrPC. The BNSS now governs new proceedings subject to commencement and savings. Section 173 BNSS addresses information in cognizable cases and permits a preliminary enquiry for specified offences in the circumstances and period stated there. The applicable provision must be determined by date.

Sources

Supreme Court of India, CBI v. Thommandru Hannah Vijayalakshmi, discussed in official judgment: https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2014/5445/5445_2014_34_1501_31393_Judgement_18-Nov-2021.pdf

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/1558/1/aA1988-49.pdf

#CorruptionLaw #PreliminaryEnquiry #BNSS