CBI probe against ex-Maha minister: Jaishri Patil seeks to be added as party

The Bombay high court (HC) on Tuesday adjourned the hearing of the petition filed by the state of Maharashtra challenging the first information report (FIR) filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against ex-home minister based on the allegations made by former Mumbai Police commissioner Param Bir Singh

The Bombay high court (HC) on Tuesday adjourned the hearing of the petition filed by the state of Maharashtra challenging the first information report (FIR) filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against ex-home minister based on the allegations made by former Mumbai Police commissioner Param Bir Singh.

HT Image

Anil Deshmukh after advocate Jaishri Patil sought to be added as a party to the proceedings.

She sought to be added as a party respondent on the grounds that the HC’s April 5 order – directing CBI to probe into Singh’s allegations – and the subsequent FIR registered by the Central agency was based on her complaint. She also accused the state of trying to sideline her by not adding her as a party.

However, when senior counsel Rafique Dada for the state opposed her request, the division bench of justice SS Shinde and justice NJ Jamadar told Patil that she should follow proper procedure and it would hear her only if she was added as a party.

This infuriated Patil and she informed the bench that she had lodged a complaint against the judges with the HC chief justice and the Chief Justice of India for “insulting and humiliating” her during a previous hearing.

Justice Shinde then clarified that his comments were part of a dialogue which happens between the bench and the advocates and the comments were not intended to humiliate or insult her, however, if she was offended, he would like to express regret for the same.

Thereafter, solicitor general Tushar Mehta for CBI and special counsel and former additional solicitor general Darius Khambatta appreciated the magnanimity of the bench and requested Patil to withdraw her complaint, which she agreed. The court then said that it would hear Patil’s application, which she had already filed, with or after the petitions of the state and Deshmukh.

Mehta assured the court that CBI would not insist on the state government to furnish documents pertaining to offences mentioned in the FIR, which includes the minutes of the police establishment board meeting of June 2020 that had ordered the reinstatement of suspended police officer Sachin Vaze and the documents regarding the allegations made by former commissioner of intelligence Rashmi Shukla, wherein she had complained to her superiors of political interference in postings and transfers of police personnel in the state.