A bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph made short work of proceedings in what was seen as a complex case involving a bitter feud between Verma and his deputy Rakesh Asthana that ended with the government sending both on leave. The bench wound up proceedings in 15 minutes by preventing counsel for the parties from making elaborate submissions and seeking their views to crystallise an interim action plan.
Verma had challenged the government decision of sending him on leave and sought a stay on the order, but the court did not take note of this prayer on Friday.
At the end of the hearing, the only change in the original action plan was to give 14 days to the CVC to conclude the probe against Verma instead of 10 days which the court had proposed at the start of proceedings. The court said it wanted the inquiry report on November 12, the next date of hearing.
A quick clarification on the decision to ask Justice Patnaik to supervise the CVC's probe followed with CJI Gogoi explaining that this "is a one-time exception which has been felt necessary by this court in the peculiar facts of this case and should not be understood to be casting any reflection on any authority of the government of India".
The court perhaps felt an added layer of supervision would enhance credibility of the sensitive inquiry.
On the ambit of the Justice Patnaik supervised CVC probe against Verma, the SC said, "The inquiry in respect of allegations made in the note/letter of the cabinet secretary dated August 24 as regards the present CBI director Alok Verma shall be completed by the CVC within a period of two weeks from today."
The cabinet secretary's communication of August 24 to the CVC contained charges by Asthana against Verma. Asthana had alleged that during the interrogation of Hyderabad-based businessman Sathish Babu Sana, an accused in a criminal case registered against meat exporter Moin Qureshi, Sana gave a statement alleging that he met TDP MP C M Ramesh who allegedly introduced him to Verma and that a bribe was paid to him.
When the Asthana issue and registration of FIR against him on orders of Verma was raised, the bench said, "We are not on Asthana." It even brushed aside Asthana's counsel Mukul Rohatgi and said, "There is no petition filed by you and pending before us. So we will not hear you."
Importantly, the CJI-led bench took into account NGO 'Common Cause' counsel Dushyant Dave's allegation that a large number of transfers effected by Rao could derail ongoing investigations, and ordered that the interim CBI director would not take any major decisions or any policy initiatives and would "perform only routine tasks that are essential to keep the CBI functional" till further orders.
The SC also put all decisions taken after Rao assumed charge under the scanner. It asked him to submit in sealed cover "a list of all decisions taken between October 23 and up to this hour (11.30am of October 26), including decisions with regard to transfer of investigations, change of investigating officers etc" and said the court would pass appropriate orders on these.
The crisp nature of proceedings belied expectations, based on previous experience, that the matter might have dragged on. Given the muck hurled by Verma and Asthana at each other in public, the hearing of such a case in the past would have gone on for hours, especially with senior advocate Fali Nariman representing petitioner Verma.
But the CJI-led bench cut short Nariman who was attempting to convince the court that the Centre had violated the fixed tenure of two years for the CBI director by citing statutes. It told attorney general K K Venugopal that "we will examine the matter". When the AG suggested that a sitting or retired high court judge could supervise the CVC inquiry, the bench flatly rejected the suggestion.
The court was initially adamant that the probe be completed in 10 days, but solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CVC, sought more time saying Diwali was round the corner. The SC said there could not be a Diwali break for an inquiry into a sensitive issue but relented to grant 14 days.
from Times of India https://ift.tt/2D94C35
