‘The Matter Is Quite Serious And Affects The Administration At Large’ Apex Court In Parambir Singh’s Plea Asks Him To Approach Bombay High Court Under Article 226.
(Judicial Quest News Network)
The Apex Court on Wednesday stated that the matter is quite serious and affects the administration at large and appears that a lot of material which has come in public domain is a consequence of the personas falling out. While dealing the plea filed by ex-Mumbai top cop Parambir Singh.
This observation was made in the order passed by the Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R. Subhash Reddy in the plea filed by former Mumbai police Commissioner Parambir Singh seeking a Central Bureau o Investigation (CBI) probe into allegatios against Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh.
In 2006, a three-judge bench issued a number of directions in Prakash Singh, case, court had issued a number of directions regarding the operational reform and functional autonomy of the police in India.That the Petitioner, abovenamed, who till recently was the Police Commissioner of Mumbai, has filed the above-mentioned Writ Petition Before this Hon’ble Court mainly seeking CBI investigation of various Alleged corrupt malpractices of Shri Anil Deshmukh, the Hon’ble Home Minister of Government of Maharashtra and to quash and set Aside the Order bearing number IPS2021/Vol.No.107/Pol-1 dated 17.03.2021 concerning the transfer of the Petitioner from the post of
Police Commissioner, Mumbai.
It is averred in the plea that the Home Minister has been instructing them to carry out official assignments and collection schemes including financial transactions as per his instructions based on his expectations and targets to collect money. These corrupt malpractices also have its linkage to the case of Antila Bomb Scare, wherein a vehicle full of Explosives was found near the house of industrialist Mukesh Ambani and further death of Mansuk Hiren the alleged owner of the said vehicle, which presently is under Investigation of ATS as well as the NIA.
During the hearing the bench posed two questions to the petitioner. The first being that why a petition has been fild before the Supreme Court under Article 32 rather than an Article 226 petition before the High Court. The Court further asked the petitioner as to why Mr. Anil Deshmukh, the person against whom they made serious allegations hasn’t even been ipleaded as a party, Senior Advocate Mukhul Rohatgi submitted that he will implead the party and regarding the maintainability of Article 32 plea he stated that it can be maintained where Article 226 can be maintained.
It is further submitted that it is a matter of serious proportions including entire state administration. NIA has come in to take up investigation of Antilla case which is commented this case. The entire state and country is rocked. The scandal knows no bounds.
Mr. Rohatgi stated that the Supreme Court had said that for effecting senior police transfers without completing 2 years I serious issue and can be done only if he is facing probe.
Justice Kaul replied “No state has affected police reforms. Nobody wants to do it, because nobody wants to let go the power”
The bench observed that the present parties were hunky dory for a long time now having fallen apart, one is making allegations against the other. It is a serious matter no doubt. High Courtis competent to deal with this issue.
The plea by Singh came close on the heels of a letter written by him to Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray alleging that Deshmukhi used frequent interference with police investigations and repeatedly call officers and give them instructions on the course of action to be followed by them while conducting investigation.
The Advocates appeared on Behal pf Petitioner are as follows
Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Utsav Trivedi, Adv.
Mr. Abinay, AOR
Ms. Srishti Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Himanshu Sachdeva, Adv.
Ms. Shivani Bhushan, Adv.
Ms. Aishwarya Samal, Adv
Abd for respondents are as follows
Dr. Gunratan Sadavarte, Adv.
Mr. Kamal Kumar Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Pawan Kumar Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Raj Singh Rana, AOR.
On further hearing, we put to learned senior counsel as to why the petition should not have been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court as the powers thereunder, if any, are wider. If investigation by an independent agency is being sought for, that is a relief which can also be granted by
the High Court. There have also been subsequent developments in the matter as has been noticed in terms of the report of Ms. Rashmi Shukla, Commissioner, State Intelligence Department. The High Court has the requisite authority to address the same. We have no doubt that the matter is quite serious and affects the administration at large. It also appears that a lot of material which has come in public domain is a
consequence of the personas falling out. Learned senior counsel also seeks to rely upon the judgment in Prakash Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.- (2006) 8 SCC 1. In our view, this is only a mantra recited
periodically, wherever the occasion so suits, and there has been no seriousness by all concerned to ever implement the directions enshrined in the judgment. These directions were based on the principle of insulating police machinery from political/executive interference to make it more efficient and to strengthen the rule of law. It appears
that none want to give up, inter alia, the control of police transfers or implement measures that would insulate the police machinery from performing its role without any uncalled for interference. In view of the aforesaid position, learned senior counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the High Court.
Liberty granted. Learned senior counsel submits that they will file the
petition during the course of the day and would like the matter to be taken up tomorrow itself. That, in our view, would be an appropriate prayer made to the High Court and not by a direction from this Court.
