Bombay High Court Considers State of Maharashtra's Petition for SIT in CBI Probe Against Ex-Home Minister. The Petition Alleges Bias of CBI Director and Seeks Fair Investigation.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

In a criminal writ petition, the State of Maharashtra sought constitution of a Special Investigation Team to monitor and take over the investigation of an FIR registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation against former Home Minister Anil Deshmukh and unknown persons for alleged corruption, including illegal transfers and postings of police officers. The petition was prompted by the issuance of notices under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to the Director General of Police and Chief Secretary of Maharashtra, requiring their appearance before the CBI. The petitioner contended that the CBI Director, Subodh Kumar Jaiswal, had earlier served as the Director General of Police of Maharashtra and was directly involved in the transfer and posting process as Vice-Chairperson of Police Establishment Board-1 and Chairperson of Police Establishment Board-2, thereby rendering the investigation biased and unable to be fair. It was argued that Mr. Jaiswal could be a witness or a potential accused in the investigation, and that his position at the helm of the investigating agency vitiated the investigation. The petitioner asserted locus standi under the Maharashtra Police Act and on the principles of loco parentis and parens patriae, contending that harassment of senior officers affected state administration and police morale. Respondent CBI opposed the petition, questioning the State’s locus and contending that the petition was an attempt to scuttle the investigation. It argued that the investigation was focused on the abuse of official position by the ex-Home Minister, not on all transfers, and that the composition of Police Establishment Boards was not relevant. CBI maintained that there were no specific pleadings of mala fides and that no material substantiated the allegations of bias. The court heard arguments from both sides, including additional submissions in support from the DGP and Chief Secretary, who were joined as respondents. The judgment was reserved on 26 November 2021 and pronounced on 15 December 2021. The court’s analysis and decision are not included in the provided text extract.

Issue of Consideration

Whether the investigation by CBI is vitiated by bias when its Director was previously DGP of Maharashtra and involved in transfers and postings under investigation; whether the State of Maharashtra has locus standi to seek constitution of a Special Investigation Team; whether the court should constitute a Special Investigation Team to ensure fair investigation.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2021 LawText (BOM) (12) 83

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3793 OF 2021

2021-12-15

Nitin Jamdar, Sarang V. Kotwal

2021:BHC-AS:19266-DB

Darius Khambata, Ranbir Singh, Tushar Hathiramani, J.P. Yagnik, Aman Lekhi, Anil Singh, Ritwiz Rishabh, Aniket Seth, Ujjwal Sinha, Aditya Thakkar, D.P.Singh, Smita Thakur, Navroz Seervai, Prachi Tatake

State of Maharashtra through the Joint Secretary, Home Department

1. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2. Shri Subodh Kumar Jaiswal, Director, CBI, 3. Mukesh Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI, 4. The Director General of Police, State of Maharashtra, 5. The Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal writ petition for constitution of Special Investigation Team and monitoring of investigation.

Remedy Sought

State of Maharashtra sought constitution of a Special Investigation Team to be monitored, and direction to CBI to hand over investigation of the concerned FIR to the SIT.

Filing Reason

Alleged bias of CBI Director due to his prior role as Director General of Police of Maharashtra, where he was directly involved in transfers and postings under investigation, and alleged harassment of senior state officers.

Previous Decisions

Division Bench of Bombay High Court order dated 5 April 2021 directing CBI preliminary inquiry; Criminal Writ Petition No.1903/2021 dismissed on 22 July 2021; SLP No.5563/2021 dismissed by Supreme Court on 18 August 2021.

Issues

Whether the investigation by CBI is vitiated by bias when its Director was previously DGP of Maharashtra and involved in transfers and postings under investigation. Whether the State of Maharashtra has locus standi to maintain the petition. Whether the court should constitute a Special Investigation Team to ensure fair investigation.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the order dated 5 April 2021 in PIL No.6/2021 mandated fair, impartial and unbiased investigation, and that CBI Director Subodh Kumar Jaiswal, as former DGP, was directly involved in PEBs governing transfers and postings, making him a potential witness or accused, thus vitiating the investigation with bias and malice. The State claimed locus under Section 4 of Maharashtra Police Act and principles of loco parentis and parens patriae due to harassment of senior officers affecting administration and morale. CBI contended that the State's conduct dis-entitled it to equitable relief, the petition aimed to scuttle investigation, the State lacked locus, respondent officers could independently challenge summons, no harassment was shown, parens patriae did not apply, and the investigation focused on abuse of position by ex-Home Minister, not all transfers. There were no specific pleadings or material to substantiate mala fides or abuse of authority by CBI officers.

Procedural History

20 March 2021: Param Bir Singh letter alleging corruption against Anil Deshmukh. 5 April 2021: Bombay HC Division Bench ordered CBI preliminary inquiry. 21 April 2021: CBI registered FIR. 3 May 2021: State filed Criminal Writ Petition 1903/2021 to quash part of FIR. 22 July 2021: Writ petition dismissed. 30 July 2021: SLP filed in Supreme Court. 18 August 2021: SLP dismissed. 18 September 2021: CBI issued notices under Section 160 CrPC to DGP and Chief Secretary. 7 October 2021: CBI replied to Chief Secretary's query. 12 October 2021: Present petition filed. 26 November 2021: Hearing reserved. 15 December 2021: Judgment pronounced.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 160
  • Maharashtra Police Act: 4, 22C, 22F
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Considers State of Maharashtra's Petition for SIT in CBI Probe Against Ex-Home Minister. The Petition Alleges Bias of CBI Director and Seeks Fair Investigation.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Cancellation of Caste Validity Certificate for Violation of Natural Justice — Committee Cannot Cancel Certificate Without Issuing Show Cause Notice and Providing Hearing