E-Paper
Case against Anil Deshmukh: HC says corruption paralyses system, full-fledged probe needed
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), while arguing against the petition filed by former home minister Anil Deshmukh petition – that sought quashing of the first information report (FIR) – in the Bombay high court (HC), has submitted that the plea is against the Constitution as it is trying to stifle the issue of corruption which the law mandates should be dealt with severely
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), while arguing against the petition filed by former home minister Anil Deshmukh petition – that sought quashing of the first information report (FIR) – in the Bombay high court (HC), has submitted that the plea is against the Constitution as it is trying to stifle the issue of corruption which the law mandates should be dealt with severely.
CBI further submitted that the principles of honesty and accountability were being violated and if the investigation is stalled, as sought in the petition, it would shake the confidence of the public.
The court reiterated that apart from Deshmukh the other officers involved could not escape their responsibility and they should be probed to uphold public confidence.
“Corruption is the root cause of what paralysed the system and hence, we want a full-fledged investigation,” the court observed.
CBI assured HC that it would investigate all persons involved in the criminal conspiracy which has been alleged by former Mumbai Police commissioner Param Bir Singh.
A division bench of justice SS Shinde and justice NJ Jamadar that was hearing the case was informed by additional solicitor general Aman Lekhi – representing CBI – that Deshmukh’s petition was trying to revisit the April 5 HC order, wherein a preliminary inquiry was ordered. He added that as the order was affirmed by the Supreme Court, such an attempt was unwarranted.
Lekhi also countered the claim by Deshmukh’s counsel Amit Desai who had said that the allegation that Deshmukh had directed former Mumbai assistant police inspector Sachin Vaze to collect money from bars and orchestras in the city were merely whispers in the corridor of the then commissioner’s office and hence, could not be relied upon. Lekhi submitted that what Vaze disclosed to Singh was not hearsay.
The court, thereafter, queried that if that was indeed the case, why did the highest officer not investigate or register an FIR, and reiterated that the role of all those involved should be investigated.
“In any department, one individual cannot do it [corruption] alone. As long as everyone is happy, no one complains. But the moment there is a transfer, then someone speaks,” remarked the bench.
The court then sought to know who the main collector was. If it was Vaze, then the question of his reinstatement arises, said HC. Lekhi responded that there were more than one individual involved and hence it was a conspiracy.
Lekhi concurred and stated that as it was a case of alleged corruption and it needed to be detected and eradicated at the earliest, the petition aimed to stifle the investigation and hence it should not be allowed as CBI had found mandatory facts which needed to be probed.
While arguing in rejoinder to CBI’s submissions, Desai questioned why the names of the police personnel were not mentioned in the FIR if it was registered to instil public confidence. He submitted that by intentionally leaving out the names of police officers and naming Deshmukh, there was an attempt to besmirch the ex-minister’s name while saving the cops involved. He added that as CBI had failed to unearth anything in Singh’s complaint it included other issues which were not considered in the April 5 order.
After hearing all the submissions, the court asked CBI to submit a report on the progress of investigation in a sealed envelope and reserved its judgment. The court has reserved its judgment in the case and will pronounce it in due course.
