Mumbai News

Bombay HC reserves order on Mumbai ex-top cop’s PIL for CBI probe against Maharashtra home minister Anil – Times of India

MUMBAI: Bombay high court on Wednesday after a marathon hearing reserved its orders on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Mumbai’s ex-police chief Param Bir Singh seeking a CBI probe into his allegations of “corrupt malpractice’’ against state home minister Anil Deshmukh, after state raised objection to its maintainability. The HC itself questioned Singh’s plea for a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) sans any first information report (FIR) being filed.
State advocate general Ashutosh Kumbhakoni sought dismissal of PIL, with exemplary cost.
A bench of chief justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Girish Kulkarni questioned the maintainability of his petition as a PIL. The bench stressed on the absence of an FIR and said as a police officer Singh would know the criminal procedure code well and would be “failing in his duty” if he didn’t file an FIR when he says an offence is being committed.
“Simply writing letters to the CM won’t do…If any citizen finds an offence being committed he is duty bound to file an FIR. You are a police officer. if you find an offence has been committed you are duty bound to file an FIR. Why did you not do it?’’ asked the CJ.
Additional solicitor general Anil Singh, for CBI, said it was willing to probe Singh’s allegations given their “seriousness’’ but left it for the HC to decide what form or by which agency.
Singh in an 8-page letter to the chief minister Uddhav Thackeray on March 20 had alleged that the minister had met with subordinate police officers including suspended Assistant police commissioner Sachin Waze and asked for collection of Rs 100 crore.
Deshmukh had denied all the allegations in the letter.
“What have you done for registration of FIR?… Did you approach the state police?’’ the CJ asked, repeatedly stressing on how without an FIR, the criminal law cannot be set in motion.
The bench asked senior counsel Vikram Nankani appearing for Singh to first satisfy the HC on the maintainability of the PIL and whether the court can direct investigation without an FIR in order to get any interim relief.
Nankani read out Singh’s letter and also referred to the report by Rashmi Shukla, commissioner (intelligence) to Director General to submit that the issue is “related to interference by political masters’’. He said Singh was not challenging his transfer order dated March 17.
The interim relief being sought is ‘safe custody’ of CCTV footage from outside Deshmukh’s residence.
The CJ also observed that there was “no affidavit’’ either by any police officer to say the alleged demand was made in his presence. The bench asked Singh’s counsel whether the ex-top cop had any first hand information himself.
Kumbhakoni said the plea was based on “hearsay’’ and contended that Singh came to court without clean hands and heart as well. He cited a Judgment that warrants no relief to petitioners who come to court with unclean hands and hearts.
Kumbhakoni also said that after IPS Rashmi Shukla’s report of August 2020 on corruption racket in police transfers, the state had in September 2020 closed the file.
Kumbhakoni said the ex-police chief had not revealed his “enmity” with the home minister. He also called Singh a “disgruntled’’ litigant and his PIL “motivated by a personal vendetta.’’
Nankani said the issue raised is larger and of grave importance and if state has done nothing yet, the HC is not powerless and can even convert a letter into a PIL. In his rejoinder to the AG, he said the state having appointed an enquiry panel headed by former HC judge K U Chandiwal shows that the state too thinks it is a serious issue.
The CJ said, “Are police officers, ministers, politicians all above the law?’’ “Do not view yourself so high, the law is above you,’’ the bench said. In 1977 Lord Denning had immortalized Thomas Fuller’s words said over 300 years ago, “be ye never so high, the law is above you.’’
The bench said if police commits a crime in presence of another police officer what would it (the police ) do? Would it not register an FIR? The HC kept reminding Singh that he was himself a police officer and knows the CrPC better than most people.
Nankani who appeared along with senior counsel Birendra Saraf and Sharan Jagtiani cited judgments but the HC asked him to cite one which specifically say without an FIR the high court can direct a probe. Nankani cited the landmark 2014 SC judgment in Lalita Kumari’s case which empowers police to even conduct an preliminary enquiry to ascertain if a cognizable offence is made out.
The bench also said, “It is only in extremely rare cases that court can order an FIR to be registered.’’ He said the HC cannot be reduced to a magistrate’s court which can direct police to register an FIR if police fails to do so.
Subhash Jha counsel for another PIL petitioner, advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay also seeking a probe based on Singh’s letter said the issue was serious and merited a probe against those running an “extortion racket’’ which was akin to “loot and plunder’’. The HC also heard submissions of advocate Alankar Kirpekar in another PIL filed by senior citizen and chartered accountant Mohan Bhide of Bhide Education Pvt ltd. His PIL also citing Singh’s letter sought a CBI probe saying allegations by the IPS officer “need to be considered in a highest serious manner.’’
Another city advocate Jaishri Patil the first to file a petition, not a PIL, on March 23, for CBI or independent agency probe against Deshmukh and role of Singh based on his letter had also sought directions to the Malabar police to register an FIR on her complaint made on March 21. Her complaint was based on Singh’s letter. Another bench had on Tuesday asked her “locus’’ but recorded AG’s submission to seek clubbing of all related petitions with Singh’s PIL. She mentioned before the HC on Wednesday that her complaint was pending.
The CJ-led bench observed that earlier it was not often that FIRs were “not registered’’.
Before 4 pm, as the hearing continued the HC called immediately for the station diary from Malabar Hill police station to know the status and action taken by them on her complaint.
The bench asked the AG if any FIR was registered based on the complaint by Patil. The AG said none had been. He relied on the landmark Supreme Court ruling of 2013 to submit that police may take a while to ascertain the existence of a cognizable offence by conducting a preliminary probe.
The AG later said the inward register had an entry but not Patil’s name in the station diary. Nankani said lack of entry in station diary just proves Singh’s point of state not likely to take any action. “This is a great example of state sweeping things under the carpet.’’
To the HC’s queries on FIR, he said, “it would be Ceaser to Ceaser because police come under the Home Department.’’
The HC said even if complaints are made against ministers or chief ministers, the CrPC provisions cannot be set aside. “Tomorrow if a PM or a HM is involved, who will investigate would you want a super power from outside to investigate,’’the CJ wondered giving hypothethical example. Nankani said in such case, there can be court monitored probes.
The HC in a short order uploaded later said, “ We have heard the parties in support of their prayers for admission of the writ petitions as well as interim relief claimed therein.’’ It said it also heard Kumbhakoni on his objection to the maintainability of the writ petitions. “Order is reserved.”

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/bombay-hc-reserves-order-on-mumbai-ex-top-cops-pil-for-cbi-probe-against-maharashtra-home-minister-anil-deshmukh/articleshow/81783562.cms