[CBI FIR Against Anil Deshmukh] “CBI Has Exceeded The Scope Of Order”: Sr Advocate Rafique Dada Argues For State of Maharashtra In Bombay High Court

  • Shruti Kakkar
  • 01:12 AM, 20 May 2021

Senior Advocate Rafique Dada appearing for the State of Maharashtra in a plea seeking to quash certain portions of FIR filed by the CBI against Ex Home Minister Anil Deshmukh on charges of bribery, corruption & criminal conspiracy before the Bombay High Court argued that the CBI had exceeded the scope of order passed by the Division Bench led by Chief Justice Dipankar Datta. 

The submission was made before the bench of Justice SJ Kathawalla & Justice Surendra Tavade while arguing a plea wherein Former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh approached the Court contending that the FIR was trying to, “destabilise the present government in Maharashtra” & also sought for interim protection from coercive steps. 

Sr Adv Rafique further apprised the Bench of the CBI demanding the presence of State’s Chief Secretary appear before it for evidence & production of the letter written by IPS Officer Rashmi Shukla, minutes of the meeting & other official documents. 

Court: You are arguing that they have exceeded the scope of order because the CBI is asking Chief Secretary for evidence & to produce the document.

“The final order was that with respect to any issue of transfer of order, the matter should be taken by the appropriate forum. It is Patil's complaint which the CJ has said should be considered.  2 of the 3 grievances of Mr Parambir Singh have been granted.”, Sr Adv Rafique Dada further submitted. 

Attention was also drawn to the settled law under the Delhi Police Special Establishment Act as per which the Delhi Police Establishment had no right to act in any case except the consent of the state or an order passed by the Court & withdrawal of consent by the State to the CBI in this regards. 

Opposing Sr Adv Rafique Dada’s submissions, ASG SV Raju appearing for CBI submitted that, “Ordinarily CBI cannot investigate in a particular state unless state consents but an exception has been carved put & the SC under Art 32 & HC under Art 226 can direct the CBI. The Division Bench of this court directed the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry.” 

ASG Raju also relied on the Apex Court judgement of Lalita Kumari to further submit that there was no restriction on the CBI to investigate only with respect to certain aspects.

It is pertinent to mention that the parties got the opportunity to make their submissions after waiting for almost six hours. The Bench of Justice SJ Kathawala & Justice Surendra Tavade assembled at 10:30 AM & raised at 11:15 PM.

The paragraphs in the present matter related to reinstatement of Assistant Police Inspector Sachin Waze & alleged undue influence over the transfer of two police officers.

One of the paragraphs from the FIR mentioned that the central agency, in its Preliminary Enquiry (PE), had found that former State Home Minister Anil Deshmukh was aware of the reinstatement of now suspended Assistant Police Inspector (API) Sachin Waze into the police after 15 years and sensitive and sensational cases being given to Waze for investigation. The second such paragraph stated that Deshmukh and others exercised "undue influence" over the transfer and postings of police officers as alleged by ex top Cop Parambir Singh.

After Bombay High Court bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta & Justice GS Kulkarni directing CBI enquiry into the corruption allegations & Supreme Court bench of Justice SK Kaul & Justice Hemant Gupta upholding Bombay High Court’s order, the CBI last month registered the FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC. 

It was stated in the FIR that the preliminary enquiry (PE) prima facie revealed that a cognizable case was made out in the matter wherein Deshmukh and unknown others attempted to obtain “undue advantage for improper and dishonest performance of his public duty”.

The matter is now listed to be heard for further hearing on May 21 at 3:00 PM.

Case Title: The State Of Maharashtra Through Additional Chief Secretary Home Department Versus The Central Bureau Of Investigation Thr Its Superintendent Of Police| WP (Criminal) 1903/ 2021