Maharashtra government, Anil Deshmukh move SC against HC order directing CBI probe

Maharashtra government and its former home minister Anil Deshmukh moved the Supreme Court on Tuesday challenging the Bombay High Court order directing a CBI probe against him and raised questions over the integrity of the central probe agency and impact on the countrys federal structureMaharashtra Government moves Supreme Court challenging the Bombay High Court order in which it ordered the CBI probe against former Home Minister Anil Deshmukh for his alleged involvement in corruption levelled by former Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singhmdash ANI ANI April 6 2021Maharashtra questioned the procedure adopted by the high court saying that the state was heard on the question of maintainability of the pleas seeking CBI investigation against Deshmukh on the allegation of corruption and the order too was reserved on that issue but the court finally ended up directing the probeAfter the high court order on Monday Deshmukh a veteran politician from Vidarbha resigned from the state governmentIn his appeal Deshmukh said the high court order raises issues of seminal importance which ldquoimpact not just the federal structure of the country impact on our polity but also the manner in which and the institutions through which investigations are to be conductedrdquoHe said the order also raises questions on whether the exparte procedure adopted by the high court has the potential of stigmatising reputation without first ascertaining the point of view of those against whom the allegations are madeldquoLast but not the least is the interpretation of a High Court of its extensive powers under article 226 of the Constitution in terms of which the entire state machinery has been supplanted as if no investigation in the state can ever serve the cause of justice and that an agency of the Central government wherein its directors reputation in the past have not been above board have now been charged with a responsibility of conducting a preliminary enquiryrdquo the plea saidHe said that without lodging an FIR the court could have directed that an application be filed before the magistrate for investigation under section 1563 of CrPCldquoThe fact that the court did not direct the petitioners before the court to follow this procedure suggests that the court believed that entire state machinery was untrustworthy that no investigation could have been made within the state by a state investigating agency and reposed faith in an outside agency by referring to it as an ldquoindependent investigating agencyrdquo knowing fully well that its credentials in the past are not such that the court can repose absolute faith in such an agencyrdquo Deshmukh said in his pleaHe said that in the annals of judicial history there has hardly been an occasion when the court has taken the statements made against a sitting minister at face value and proceeded to direct an outside agency without calling for a response from the minister to conduct a preliminary inquiryldquoThat presently the CBI today is being headed by an interim director the legality of which is also subjudice before this court This also is a factor that should have been taken into account before the court passed the order that it didrdquo the plea saidDeshmukh further said that the high court had chosen not to follow the procedure thereby showing utter lack of confidence in the state machinery as if every investigating officer lacked the confidence of the court in conducting a fair and impartial inquiryHe said that the court must have been aware of the fact that the Maharashtra government had withdrawn its consent for the CBI to investigate matters in the territory of the stateldquoThe court should have kept in mind since such conductinghanding over preliminary inquiry to the CBI impacts the federal structure and has the potential of biased investigations which may not serve the cause of justicerdquo he saidThe former minister who sought exparte stay on the High Court verdict said that since now he has resigned from the post the state machinery can freely conduct its investigations and the apprehensions expressed by the High Court contained in the impugned order no longer existldquoIt is therefore a matter of concern that the entire state machinery had been jettisoned and the normal processes of law bypassed and in the exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution the court has straight away directed a preliminary inquiry to be conducted by the CBIrdquo he saidDealing with the allegations levelled by former Mumbai Police commissioner Param Bir Singh Deshmukh said that there is not an iota of substantive evidence that is placed before the court to even prima facie establish that any of the allegations made have an element of truth and is ldquopure hearsayrdquoSingh in his plea filed on March 25 sought a CBI probe against Deshmukh who he claimed had asked police officers including suspended cop Sachin Waze to extort Rs 100 crore from bars and restaurants Deshmukh has denied any wrongdoingEarlier in the day Bombaybased lawyer Jayshree Patil on whose criminal writ petition the high court had ordered the CBI probe had filed a caveat in the top court seeking to be heard before any order is passed in the matterIn its 52page judgement the high court said Singhs allegations against Deshmukh had put at stake the citizens faith in the state policeSuch allegations made by a serving police officer against the state home minister could not be left unattended and were required to be probed into if prima facie they made a case of a cognisable offence the high court saidThe high courts verdict came on three PILs including one filed by Singh and a criminal writ petition filed last month seeking several reliefs as also a CBI probe into the matterThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever