The State Intelligence Department (SID) on Friday lodged a complaint against unknown persons for leaking a report submitted by the former Commissioner of Intelligence Rashmi Shukla in August 2020 over a purported cash for transfer scam within the police department.
The police complaint stated that some unknown person had obtained a classified letter and classified information from the department, following which the police have registered a First Information Report under section 30 (fraudulently retaining a message delivered by mistake) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, sections 44(b) (failure to furnish information in time) and 66 (computer related offence) of the Information Technology Act, 2008 and section 5 (wrongful communication of information) of the Official Secrets Act, 1923.
The assistant police commissioner of the cyber department of the Mumbai police crime branch will investigate the case.
Home department officials said under the condition of anonymity that immediate action against Shukla was unlikely. Officials said that the copy that was reportedly leaked was the SID’s office copy and did not have Shukla’s signature.
On Thursday chief secretary Sitaram Kunte had submitted a report to chief minister Uddhav Thackeray which detailed the circumstances under which Shukla had created the report.
{{/usCountry}}On Thursday chief secretary Sitaram Kunte had submitted a report to chief minister Uddhav Thackeray which detailed the circumstances under which Shukla had created the report.
{{/usCountry}}Kunte’s brief stated that Shukla, who is currently on deputation with the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) intercepted the calls of six persons under the guise of “public safety” and thus “misguided the authorities”. It further stated that no transfers of police officials took place between June 27 and September 1, 2020 –- the period in which the calls were intercepted -- and thus no scam had occurred.
Earlier this week, Leader of Opposition Devendra Fadnavis had distributed the covering letter of the report submitted by Shukla to the then Director General of Police Subodh Jaiswal on August 25, who in turn, had forwarded it to Kunte, the then additional chief secretary (Home), the following day.
Fadnavis alleged that Shukla had “sought proper permissions from then additional chief secretary (home) and intercepted phone calls of several police officials and politicians.”
Fadnavis further said that he had in his possession a pen drive with 6.3GB of data from the intercepted calls, which contained the voices of police officers and politicians closely related to the home minister and home department.
Kunte’s brief however pointed out that no pen drive was attached to the report submitted by Shukla. It further raised a doubt on whether the IPS officer had leaked the report and contended that if that were the case then she would be liable for “strict action”.
“The leak of the report has led to breach of privacy of the officers whose names have been mentioned in the report. It has also led to their defamation. The so-called deals for the transfers mentioned in the report and actual transfers done by the government differ. This proves that there was no question of any scam in the transfers,” the brief stated.
Shukla did not respond to the phone calls and text messages.
Shukla reportedly apologized for intercepting the calls, Kunte’s note said.
“Shukla then personally met me, home minister Anil Deshmukh, chief minister Uddhav Thackeray and expressed her apology. She also cited the family reasons, including her husband’s demise while requesting to not initiate any action against her. She also requested permission to withdraw the report, but since there were no such provisions, she was not given the permission. However, her request to not initiate the action was accepted on humanitarian grounds,” the report stated.
“It is not very clear if the apology was given in writing and the letter is with the home minister. No such letter is in the files at the home department. Action cannot be initiated on the basis of the oral communication between the officer and her superiors including additional chief secretary, home minister or the chief minister,” the home department officer said.
“The action, which is the prerogative of the Centre, can only be taken after conducting preliminary and department inquiries,” the official added.
Reacting to Kunte’s note, Fadnavis on Friday said that it was “full of fallacies” and appeared to be “fabricated”.
“It deliberately hid the fact that the Indian Telegraph allows police agencies to tap the phone for incitement of commission of offence. Even anti corruption bureau taps the phones under this provision to unearth the attempts of the corruption. The CS report has conveniently overlooked the provision and has stated the part related to the national security and public safety,” Fadnavis said.
The government should also speak who stalled the CID inquiry recommended by the then DGP Subodh Kumar Jaiswal,” he said.
Minority affairs minister and Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Nawab Malik said that people close to Fadnavis may find themselves in trouble after the complaint filed by the intelligence department.
“Yes we brought the facts from the Rashmi Shukla report to the fore as it was our duty to tell the facts to the people of Maharashtra. The report by Shukla was brought to the light by Fadnavis to create confusion among the people and defame the state government. I think Fadnavis has realised, after a case registered by the police for leaking the report, that some of his close aides could be in trouble. There are a few people close to him, who are suspected to be linked to the leakage of the report,” Malik said.
Shukla’s report named senior politicians, middlemen and police officers, who allegedly sought transfers and postings of their liking. While the report did not state that any direct transfer of money to these politicians took place, it did refer to “monetary exchange” between police officers and middlemen acting in close connection with politicians. HT has seen a copy of the report.