[Param Bir Singh v. Anil Deshmukh] Constitution envisages rule of law and not rule of goons having political support: Bombay High Court

A Minister being openly accused of corrupt practices by a senior police officer is unprecedented and unheard of, the Bombay High Court observed while allowing a preliminary inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the allegations against former State Home Minister Anil Deshmukh. .A Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni agreed with the submissions made by Senior Advocate Vikram Nankani, appearing for former Commissioner of Mumbai Police Param Bir Singh, and Advocate Subhash Jha, appearing for another petitioner that “an unprecedented case has come before the court”..“It was unheard of and unprecedented that a Minister could be so openly accused of wrongdoings and corrupt practices by none other than a senior police officer attracting wide attention from all and sundry,” the judgment said. .Constitutional courts would continue to uphold the ideals of the Constitution and continue to step in to protect any violation of the principles of the Constitution, caused “by anyone, howsoever high an office he occupies”, the Court emphasised..In fact, what the Constitution envisages is a rule of law and not rule of goons having political support.Bombay High Court.The judgment running into 52 pages noted that the allegations made in the complaint lodged by Dr Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil with the Malabar Hill Police Station were of a serious nature against the highest functionary of the State. The Court also took note of the fact that no action was taken on the complaint lodged by Dr Patil. With respect to the submissions made by Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni on this aspect, the Court said,"...he [AG] has been fair to say that the complaint of Dr. Patil was not processed. Although an impression was sought to be initially created that a preliminary enquiry was on, it was ultimately conceded by Shri Kumbhakoni that apart from an entry in the Inward Register, no further/other action was taken on such complaint. Thus, there cannot be any two opinions that the police by not registering an FIR on receipt of Dr. Patil’s complaint, and then again by not notifying her that the complaint would not be investigated, have not acted in accordance with law...".The Bench also expressed that the allegations in Dr Patil's plea discloses the commission of cognizable offences by Deshmukh. In the Court's prima facie view, the complaint should have been acted upon as required under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and as judicially interpreted by the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari..In these circumstances, the Court agreed that there is need for an unbiased, impartial, fair but effective probe so that the truth is unearthed and the devil, if any, shamed in accordance with procedure established by law..Since Deshmukh was the Home Minister and police department was under his control and direction, an independent agency like CBI would be required for an impartial probe, the Court added.“Here, Shri Deshmukh is the Home Minister. The police department is under his control and direction. There can be no fair, impartial, unbiased and untainted probe, if the same were entrusted to the State Police Force. As of necessity, the probe has to be entrusted to an independent agency like the CBI.".The Court, however, said that there is no immediate reason to direct registration of an FIR by the CBI based on Dr Patil’s complaint. The interests of justice would be sufficiently served if the Director, CBI is directed to initiate a preliminary inquiry into the complaint of Dr Patil, the Court added. Such an inquiry is required to be completed within 15 days of this order, the Court stipulated..“To instill public confidence and safeguard the Fundamental Rights of the citizens, it is necessary that an inquiry and investigation is conducted by an independent agency and for such reasons, we consider it to be in the paramount public interest that an independent probe in the present circumstances would meet the ends of justice,” it was observed. .The allegations, the Court noted, were such that it would have a direct impact on the faith of citizens in the functioning of the police departments."Prima facie, the issues are such that the very faith of citizens in the functioning of the police department is at stake. If there is any amount of truth in such allegations, certainly it has a direct effect on the citizens’ confidence in the police machinery in the State. Such allegations, therefore, cannot remain unattended and are required to be looked into in the manner known to law when, prima facie, they indicate commission of a cognizable offence." .The judges, therefore, opined that when complaints are received against high ranking public officials, in order to maintain the credibility of the State machinery, they could not be mere spectators..[BREAKING] Param Bir Singh v Anil Deshmukh: Bombay High Court gives CBI 15 days to conduct preliminary inquiry.Interestingly, the maintainability of public interest litigation petitions and the unimpressive manner in which one of the petitions was drafted was brought to light. However, the Court said that it did not want to get drawn into the controversy of maintainability of the PILs, and instead deemed it fit to narrow down the scope of its order on the action that could be taken on the complaint of Dr. Patil. The Court observed that Dr. Patil’s plea raised an important issue on the lack of enforcement of law by the police.“True it is that Dr. Patil’s effort in drafting the CrWP (criminal plea) betrays lack of proper care and attention as well as expertise but the issue raised by her is quite serious and we do not think that it would be prudent to refuse interference only on such ground,” the order reads..[Read Judgment]