[Anil Deshmukh case] Bombay High Court rejects Maharashtra govt plea for SIT probe

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed the plea filed by the Maharashtra government challenging summons issued by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to Chief Secretary Sitaram Kunte and State Director General of Police (DGP) Sanjay Pandey in connection with the case registered against former State Home Minister Anil Deshmukh..The Bench of Justices Nitin Jamdar and SV Kotwal also declined the prayer to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the case instead of the CBI."Considering the totality of the circumstances including the conduct of Maharashtra government as noticed by the judicial orders and manifested from the record, the government is not entitled to any relief in this petition. There is no substance in the contention of the State that CBI is disentitled to carry out investigation in the matter. No case is made out for withdrawing the investigation from CBI and entrust it to SIT as prayed for" the Court said dismissing the plea.The Bench had reserved its verdict in the plea on November 26, 2021. .Additional Solicitor General Aman Lekhi had opposed the plea filed by the State, which he claimed was an attempt to frustrate the probe against Deshmukh.Lekhi contended that when Jaiswal was appointed CBI Director in May this year, the Maharashtra government did not raise any objections before the High Court or the Supreme Court, and so present plea was filed belatedly.He had further submitted that the State had no locus to file the petition on behalf of its officers, who could challenge the summons issued to them in their personal capacity..Senior Advocate Darius Khambata appearing for Maharashtra government had contended that current CBI director Subodh Kumar Jaiswal had been the former DGP of Maharashtra. He had been a part of the Police Establishment Board (PEB) which was overseeing the transfer and postings of the State's police officers.In light of this, Jaiswal, who is now heading the agency which is probing these allegations, would not be able to conduct an impartial investigation, it was argued.The court however reasoned that assuming Jaiswal was the head of the organisation by itself did not establish that "he has abdicated his duty". The court also noted that it was the State which is attributing the term "accused" to Jaiswal and consequently to CBI. "There is no reason why any adverse imputation should be made against Respondent no.3 (Mukesh Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police) who is the senior officer in the CBI in his own rights" the Bench emphasized. .Another contention by State was that the issuing of summons to Kunte and Pandey, highest officers in the State, was a way to harass them. The Bench however refuted the contention by pointing out that as officers of the State, the Kunte and Pandey were "expected to co-operate with the investigation carried out by CBI pursuant to orders of this Court". The Bench reasoned that calling the officers to Delhi at inconvenient time could be termed as harassment or embarrassment and may affect their duties. "We fail to understand how requesting to participate in the investigation would amount to harassment of these two officers." the bench emphasized. .Khambata was briefed by Advocates Ranbir Singh, Tushar Hathiramani and Assistant Public Prosecutor JP Yagnik. Lekhi appeared alongwith Additional Solicitor General with Anil Singh and Advocates Ritwiz Rishabh, Aniket Seth, Ujjwal Sinha, Aditya Thakkar, DP Singh and Smita Thakur. .[Read order]