Maharashtra’s ex-intel chief Rashmi Shukla moves Bombay HC against second ‘false’ FIR – Times of India

MUMBAI: Rashmi Shukla, the ex-intelligence chief of Maharashtra has once again knocked on the doors of Bombay high court. On Thursday her counsel mentioned a new quashing petition she filed, this one against a new first information report (FIR) registered by Colaba police station in Mumbai against her. Her plea is that the FIR is “false and entirely fabricated for political expediency.’’
The HC bench of Justices P B Varale and S M Modak agreed to hear it on Friday.
The Mumbai police had last week registered the FIR against Shukla in connection with alleged illegal phone tapping of at least two senior politicians—Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut in November 2019 before formation of the MVA government in the state and oath-taking of Uddhav Thackeray as Chief Minister on November 28, 2019–and Eknath Khadse. The FIR says Raut’s phone was under surveillance for
Shukla’s petition contends that she is being singled out again. She said the FIR was lodged after IPS officer Sanjay Pandey took over as Mumbai police commissioner and is based on a report he had submitted earlier.
Her petition says that the period of offence alleged is 2018-2020 when she was Commissioner State Intelligence Department (SID) where she had continued till September 2021 and no illegality had been found with her actions then.
Her petition says, “the unfounded and erroneous report of Sanjay Pandey unfairly targets and appropriates singular blame on the petitioner, echoing a political line of attack claiming that The FIR contends that the petitioner deliberately and with undue political motives conducted technical surveillance on certain political persons.’’Her case is that because of her phone-tap report of August 2020 against the alleged corruption among officers and politicians in police postings and transfers, the State is harassing her by lodging multiple FIR’s against her.
On March 4, the HC had granted Shukla who was earlier also the Pune police commissioner, interim protection against any coercive action in an FIR registered last month against her under the Indian Telegraph Act for recommending phone tap on certain elected representatives including Congress leader Nana Patole.
Shukla’s quashing petition also says that the FIR is “maliciously instituted’’ and there is no record as under the rules six months after interception the files can be destroyed, hence the case is a way to harass her.
It says, “interception of messages by her was fully compliant with the standard operating procedure for such interceptions and all requisite permissions were duly obtained. The petitioner further submits that no such alleged discrepancies in the interception of political persons were flagged with regard to the concerted action by the sanctioning authority, ACS Home. It is also submitted that the mandated review committee under rule 16 of the rule 419A of the Indian Telegraph Rules for interception requests as mandated by the Indian Telegraph Act, which conducts a review of all state-wide interception requests every 2 months, did not report any concerns or state that the interception was not in accordance with the provisions of the act with regard to the alleged interception requests in question. The sanction for interception was also not revoked by them. This compels the question as to why after so many years, and no new material has the state chosen to believe any allegations that suggest otherwise, and doubt the work and capabilities of the sanctioned review committee.’’
Her petition says, “allegation made in the First Information Report, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute an offence against” her. It adds, “That in the absence of sanction to prosecute the applicant, the registration of FIR is bad in law and the subsequent conduct of present State Government shows their intention to harass her, for the act which Petitioner did while discharging her official duties.